Like I’ve been saying all along…. (also see Chart ) (excerpts from Herald Standard coverage of the commissioners meeting)
- An audit submitted in 2018 noted expenses already spent out of the sales fund must be transferred from the general fund to the sales fund.
- The next step, Witt said, is presenting the 2011 free-and-clear sale distributions in court for approval next week. That will be followed by a 30-day period for objections to distribution amounts and mailings of the judge’s order and property distribution sheets to the former property owners and purchasers of the 155 parcels on the list for that year.
The county should receive roughly $111,000 from the $476,535 to be distributed, a total that will go back into a tax sale distribution fund, Witt said.
- “(I)t’s my understanding that for 2017 and 2018, there’s going to be an adjustment where the funds that were taken out to pay general expenses are going to be put back in to replenish the funds for those years,” Witt said. “And then for 2011 through 2016, all of these sales, all of the distributions that will be going to the county are going to go back into that fund, because once again, funds were taken from that fund, and these are just basically reimbursements from the county.”
Witt said the county would be able to cover the 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2017 free-and-clear sales and 2011, 2012 and 2013 upset sales as well as additional sales beyond those.
And my comment then, before and still now……….. yes while the county proceeds will be returned to the tax claim sale fund to build the account those monies taken from the account incorrectly as per the audit needs be reimbursed by the county general fund. The estimate as per the audit is $1.7 million. Returning the county’s share of the proceeds is correct and will add up but it will not add up to the estimated $1.7 while taking the costs from it at the same time. I am no mathematician, I am no CPA (but then again neither is Sam Lynch I am told), I have never filed bankruptcy but I can do simple math. Two commissioners do not want to replace these funds because doing so would mean allocating the estimated $1.7 million which means raise taxes or reduce overall costs. It is a debt of the General Fund and if the year end audit always performed by Zelenkofske Axelrod fails to give the Finding they are not doing their job. (note they gave the finding in 2004). I will continue to monitor.
Also, yes it must be chronological out of fairness to those lienholders waiting. There are more than just school and municipalities as lien holders. I understand Lohr and Vicites want 2016 done because it is under their watch but you dont take such an action to make it look good on your part. We must do so chronologically. Chart