WALHALLA — From July 2006 – June 2008, Oconee County collected $15.2 million more in revenue than it spent.

Either the employees of Oconee County are very thrifty, or the Oconee County Council has seemingly given them more money than they can spend.

As County Council members debate issues of spending and taxation, the latest financial reports available make it clear that in two of the last three years, the county has grossly underspent its budget while piling up more revenue than anticipated.

Among the “financial highlights” of the 2007-2008 audit, it is noted that operating expenditures were $9.2 million less than the $48.35 million in taxes and other revenue collected.

That performance, according to the audit, came a year after the county’s revenue exceeded expenditures by $6 million. That’s a two-year gain of $15.2 million.

The auditor’s specific numbers can’t be found in the county-prepared Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for 2007-2008, but that document also attests to budgeted funds unspent and higher-than-expected taxes collected.

Neither the audit nor a CAFR has been completed for 2008-2009. The following numbers are from the last available report.

Revenues

The recession took a toll on property tax collections in 2007-08, which came in $633,098 under expectations, and on fees for services (building permits, deed filings, etc.), that came in $843,398 under budget.

Despite that, the county had total revenues of $40.23 million, some $666,615 more than budgeted.

The shortfall was made up through a variety of sources, the biggest being $598,111 more in state aid than it had expected. It also picked up $687,153 in fee-in-lieu-of-tax payments; added $120,651 labeled “rural fire,” and added an unbudgeted $30,352 to its coffers via “impact fees for tires.”

Expenses

While the county benefited from unexpected revenue sources and ended up with more money that it expected in 2007-2008, those revenues pale in comparison to the budgeted money collected but not spent.

Some of the “savings” against budget could reasonably be attributed to the recession and corresponding loss of revenues. For instance, Building Codes, which issues building permits, came up $406,482 short of its projected revenues. It also underspent its budget by $91,489, of which $66,327 was salaries.

Similarly, the Register of Deeds, which is responsible for recording sale documents, underspent by $77,625.

However, the recession wouldn’t seem to explain the fact that 50 percent (13 of 26) of the line items listed under general government operating were either over-budgeted or underspent by 10 percent or more in 2007-2008. Two other line items failed to meet the 10 percent threshold but still had underspending of $113,450 and $101,487 respectively.

Only three line items were over budget — elections ($20,634), direct aid ($9,988) and non-departmental expenses ($420,235), which includes costs shared by multiple departments, including the county’s lawyers and auditors.

Altogether, the county underspent its general operating budget by $2,263,757 in 2007-2008. (See boxed material for detail.)

The courts did a much better job budgeting, coming in just $130,668 under a budget of $2.3 million.

Public safety, which makes up nearly 30 percent of the county’s operating budget, came in with $877,104 to spare, led by a surplus of $344,800 in “rural fire control” and $161,341 in communications.

As a percentage, the Road Department missed its budgetary mark the worst, spending just over half of the $5.3 million it was allotted. Recreation also saved the county $377,394, including $177,138 for parks and recreation and $200,199 for libraries.

No immunity

Virtually every corner of county government seemed incapable of spending the funds provided in 2007-2008, including the County Council, which left $147,621 in its contingency fund.

Other notable frugalities include $377,280 left stashed in the “infrastructure, Economic Development” line item, $85,000 in unspent professional engineering fees, $285.430 left in the human resources’ “insurance/bonds” line item and $162,952 in information technologies wages.

The county even struggled in budgeting the basics. It missed its water budget by $10,434, its electric bill by $43,868 and its gas and fuel expenses (non-law enforcement) by $61,211. All were fund surpluses.

There was $116,695 left in solid waste salaries and $39,642 in left over professional fees in that department, as well as $148,750 in excess tipping fees.

The assessor underspent her wage line item by $68,218 and left $55,000 untapped for data processing. The Sheriff even had $209,000 left in his wage budget.

Rural fire had ups and downs in its spending, going $139,110 over in small equipment, but leaving $154,473 in wages, $19,773 in data processing, $25,000 in capital building funds, and $225,000 in grant matches.

The animal shelter left $25,000 in a line item termed “operational,” and then there was the road department where, in addition to underspending in wages by $493,588, the department also left $1.5 million in the bank that was to go for paving roads and another $447,715 for bridge replacements.

The county left $9.2 million in county coffers, according to the auditor. And it goes on, as the 2008-2009 budget outlined $1.4 million in “carryover” funding.

Tomorrow: Less government spending may be good, but it begs the question of where the tax money has gone and what it means to the county’s residents and businesses.