[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6495055,"mediaKeyId","5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a","parentId",5587763,"title","Seward County outlines worst-case $5.96 million tax payback as commissioners consider mill-levy increase","audioSeconds",8357,"startMs",183000,"endMs",8540000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a&start=183&end=8540","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a/thumbnail_183000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6495055/Seward-County/Kansas/Seward-County-outlines-worst-case-596-million-tax-payback-as-commissioners-consider-mill-levy-increase","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6495055-587d1cdef1eb3171addaa3f24eb87586/orig.mp4?Expires=1770392669&Signature=mcxULLwrsY0Vkcjd2cXU8aioFMTcKIdPlAt4w5eQLsaBtpMK0Tsq3oRsX3Qr2KWNLv8bqhYzFNWTO4~EBSraJXY0eJF4Y03Cbxv-dq~EZz8QhP6wtl4bCnubiu0KljuG~eTnl79NITIz~XUmOCY72SgPOzYCBboFb82s8yB3XepHD6nA70xXQ5Of4xXPpP2d1VPsLi~9-EFOkmq~3w6VkYjl~RHh-rOaS7ERaCJVYM0CNmP6oFKyJSsOc~PUlR3rpq3vSkDpoGahXcauCsgMoeJLqCA8CbMS3izi3ZZof8M36AbdFhiaEwhDJ0Hgm~kYVCw~3SA-lrdqE5F~h1t2Wg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Seward County","date","2025-08-14T00:00:00Z","article","Seward County officials told a crowded Aug. 14 town hall that the county’s 2026 budget proposal currently assumes a worst-case payback of $5,955,361.12 tied to an outstanding Board of Tax Appeals case, and that most of a proposed mill-levy increase would cover that potential liability.

The declaration came during a presentation by April Wharton, Seward County administrator, who summarized the county’s budget process and the drivers behind the proposed revenue increase. “This is a worst case scenario number,” Wharton said of the $5,955,361.12 figure, adding that it “does include statutory interest, which the statute rate of interest is 8.25% right now.”

Why it matters: a single large tax protest could reduce county assessed value for multiple years and require retroactive refunds to several taxing entities. County staff told residents the $5.96 million estimate covers protests dating to 2018 through 2020 and includes the interest that would accrue if the county must repay the protested amount.

County context and next steps

Wharton and commissioners said the payback stems from a tax protest brought to the Board of Tax Appeals that was appealed to district court and is currently being heard in Sedgwick County. The county’s outside counsel and financial advisors advised budgeting to the worst-case figure because of timing uncertainty: budgets must be certified to the county clerk by Oct. 1 and the county was required to publish notices by July 20 showing whether it planned to exceed the revenue-neutral rate.

Commissioners have held multiple budget work sessions since June and instructed department heads to identify cuts. Wharton told the meeting that department-level reductions already proposed include reduced hours, delayed hiring and eliminating several vacant positions; the county has also set aside $500,000 per year since the current commission took office in 2023. “We were able to save close to a million” through cuts asked of departments, Wharton said.

Public impact and uncertainty

Residents at the town hall asked how the county would collect a potential judgment and whether taxes would be refunded if the court reduces the obligation. Wharton said the published budget would reflect a worst-case revenue need but that commissioners can lower mill levies later if the court decision reduces the liability. “If we found out something before it has to be certified by October 1, they could make that adjustment,” Wharton said.

The county also described possible repayment arrangements with the protesting taxpayer. Wharton said the county negotiated a multi‑year repayment with DCP National Helium in an earlier case; commissioners said they would seek similar arrangements if the current taxpayer agreed.

Other budget details discussed

- Revenue drivers: County appraiser procedures, assessment rates (residential assessed at 11.5%, commercial at 25%, agricultural at 30% of production value) and the role of oil, gas and agricultural valuations in the tax base.
- Statutory deadlines: valuation notices, revenue-neutral publication rules and the Oct. 1 budget certification deadline. Wharton explained that revenue-neutral notices are informational — not bills — and trigger public hearings when a jurisdiction plans to collect more property-tax revenue in dollars than the previous year.
- Mandates and cuts: Wharton listed 18 state-mandated county services (public health, road and bridge, jails, elections, property valuation, etc.) and told attendees that some cuts would reduce services. The county is constrained by cash-basis budgeting laws and by the need to meet legally mandated services.

Quotes and attributions in context

- “This is a worst case scenario number,” — April Wharton, Seward County administrator, on the $5,955,361.12 payback estimate.
- “We were able to save close to a million,” — April Wharton, on department-level budget reductions after commissioners asked department heads to cut line items.

Ending

County leaders said they prefer not to raise taxes and urged residents to follow public hearings this fall; the commission plans a public hearing on the county budget Sept. 15 at 5:30 p.m. in the Commission Chambers. Officials reiterated that the published figures reflect worst-case assumptions required by statutory deadlines and said they will lower the proposed levy if a court ruling reduces the county’s liability.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Seward County - Town Hall Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","Seward County officials told a crowded Aug. 14 town hall that the county’s 2026 budget proposal currently assumes a worst-case payback of $5,955,361.12 tied to an outstanding Board of Tax Appeals case, and that most of a proposed mill-levy increase would cover that potential liability.","taxTitle","Seward County, Kansas","taxId",70665,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6495047,"Seward County landfill described as regional enterprise; officials explain rates, reserves and closure fund",0,5805000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a&start=5805&end=5805","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a/thumbnail_5805000.jpg","/articles/6495047/Seward-County/Kansas/Seward-County-landfill-described-as-regional-enterprise-officials-explain-rates-reserves-and-closure-fund","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6495047-c04776afb342cdbdcf24e770b8a71775/orig.mp4?Expires=1770392669&Signature=O8y8lVYT~096TwD1lFXjhukYQBpJKsh2Esrbz1gDZfDdPL2u1gGs6eG4XYjjrcLazFHtBLIKhPCgY~qwA7o36mzzUGxM6jXwU3scqcole5Y2rGRkUQLs5~7eDxu8rixoGu9KceJKsjz3SnHMuDlOV4PZTlVUAU9gOEkZdZtNX6SL2PViUgGwMDdBeEKsciMx00~V~uhdn9LQ60pWhNoQuWTGlW1BsuBZ~-0Un6uvgYj8tG0SDIUUlcQx8J0AgFVnLatIoqdqvOnEWdvJ2n2~WWDaJvDGV5oWCYIG2rGEOjnQtIOIZbjxBmo1M3TKiuzjzGREN6N498tcpeVOXJx80A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Seward County landfill officials told residents at an Aug. 14 town hall that the county-operated landfill functions as a regional facility that pays wages and benefits, contributes to the general fund and retains a regulatory closure fund that cannot be used for other expenditures.

Key points presented

Brock Feiner, landfill director, said the landfill covers 100% of its operating costs (wages and benefits), reimburses the county for approximately $2–2.5 million annually and returns a full mill to the general fund (about $266,000). The landfill’s operating budget was described as roughly $13 million, and county officials emphasized the facility has not been subsidized by tax dollars.

Closure fund and statutory limits

Officials explained that Kansas rules require a multi‑million dollar closure fund to cover eventual pit closure and remediation; the county cannot use those restricted funds for other purposes. “That fund is not a slush fund,” April Wharton said. The county said the required landfill closure fund target is about $5 million and that the facility pays cash for cell construction (a new 10‑acre cell costs about $1 million to build, officials said).

Regional role and gate rates

The county described the landfill as the regional Subtitle D facility that emerged when many smaller county landfills closed; it accepts waste from neighboring counties and across state lines. Officials told the meeting that the landfill charges the same gate rate to residents and non‑residents and that volume from a broad region keeps per‑ton costs manageable.

Transparency and reserves

Attendees asked why the county holds reserves; officials replied that reserves are legally segregated and, in some cases, restricted by statute. The county said open‑records requests can be used to obtain more detailed budget and court records where available.

Ending

County leaders said the landfill is a significant ongoing revenue source for the county and a required public service; they urged residents to use open‑records requests for line‑item detail and reiterated that the closure fund and restricted reserves are not available for general budget purposes.

","At an Aug. 14 town hall, county landfill director Brock Feiner described the landfill as a regional facility that pays its own costs, contributes a mill to the general fund and holds mandatory closure reserves; officials said out‑of‑county users pay the same gate rate and the landfill helps reimburse county services.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6495051,"Seward County pitches half-cent sales tax for roads; commissioners present 10‑year plan and cost estimates",40,6463000,6503000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a&start=6463&end=6503","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5587763-3f873be7c1e8a9d027d08159a26d542a/thumbnail_6463000.jpg","/articles/6495051/Seward-County/Kansas/Seward-County-pitches-half-cent-sales-tax-for-roads-commissioners-present-10year-plan-and-cost-estimates","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6495051-cd0896f7b84d9a23cacaad7f706fcf15/orig.mp4?Expires=1770392669&Signature=jGbn76xRs-wYJU3qrzsaqYN5MrYvCl28B9Ry82B1JpheNZUkBOVD7f07BjB4A0A-29H3IcHcyAPgw0OgGUW9qe-6JKPMAde3EZR8rzYjFiebx1PJsafbEs0NVlT~frutKtRRHgEQtV92Dc5x4QF-4qu9c609sJH43ZnB9zn9dS7mRqUQi02N3dI9M19LFab-hAUW0rxdLsW0aOockX50MuZDoE6NiqHXDACoo-ejn7Rb~IX~41mZUuvIN~6L7gju2whwnx1Chh2hkpIOu5f84L6uzyEZQUGd7vFEp8aaK0~0wAy8Lwd1C81J1DduJLPW3~F7xFPdYAwFCt3ErUYG6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Seward County officials outlined a proposed half-cent county sales tax at an Aug. 14 town hall, saying the ballot measure — if approved in November — would pay for a 10‑year road-and-bridge plan and generate roughly $2 million a year.

The proposal: county staff and commissioners described the ballot question as a half-cent local option sales tax dedicated to road and bridge work. \"The half cent sales tax, the funds will only be used for road and bridge work in Seward County,\" Mark Johnson, the county’s road and bridge director, said during the presentation.

Why it matters: Road and bridge officials laid out specific costs residents will recognize. Examples presented at the meeting included a 28‑mile milling and overlay project that cost $5,867,121 (about $209,000 per mile), chip seal at roughly $25,000 per mile, crack sealing at $5,000 per mile, and a 24‑inch culvert at approximately $960. Officials said the county recently paid $453,000 to rebuild four miles of Road O and stressed rising costs: an overlay per mile that cost $125,000 in 2020 had risen by 68% by the most recent projects.

County rationale and revenue options

Commissioners and staff said the measure spreads cost across purchasers and visitors as well as residents; they noted the county receives relatively small state motor-fuel distributions (about $250,000 per year) which will not fund major improvements. The county used a bond for a recent $6 million overlay; debt service on that bond is about $773,000 annually and the sales-tax revenues would help repay that obligation while funding maintenance.

Pilot projects and maintenance strategy

Road and bridge staff described pilot treatments intended to extend service life on high-traffic gravel routes — including PermaZyme and Base 1 products — and reported a state agency interest in the county’s experiments. The county reported a large volume of truck traffic related to local agriculture and processing facilities and said heavier and larger equipment increases wear.

Public comments and framing

Speakers at the meeting voiced both support and concern. A Lawson‑area resident said the measure would spread costs to visitors and help preserve road safety; other attendees urged more transparency on prior spending decisions. Commissioners emphasized the measure is limited by language on the ballot to road-and-bridge work only and said revenue would be deposited in a special highway fund and could not be used for other purposes.

Ending

If approved, county staff said the half-cent tax would generate about $2 million per year and be applied to a 10‑year plan for maintenance and capital projects; the county will provide details publicly before the Nov. election but will not advocate for a particular vote at town halls. The measure requires voter approval to take effect.

","County leaders presented road and bridge costs, pilot treatments and a proposed half-cent sales tax on the Nov. ballot designed to raise about $2 million annually for roads. Officials said rising material and equipment costs and heavier truck traffic motivate the measure.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Seward County outlines worst-case $5.96 million tax payback as commissioners consider mill-levy increase

Seward County landfill described as regional enterprise; officials explain rates, reserves and closure fund

Seward County pitches half-cent sales tax for roads; commissioners present 10‑year plan and cost estimates