The Delaware County Council and budget staff spent the latter portion of a Sept. 4 workshop reviewing the auditor’s proposed 2026 budget, highlighting personnel reclassifications, software purchases tied to grants work, and a sharp rise in contractual services.

Auditor staff said the office requested a standard 4% across‑the‑board increase but noted benefits and reclassifications drive much of the change. Staff described one reorganization that eliminated a senior flat room deputy and moved existing personnel into a grants and compliance deputy role (budgeted at a $38,050 salary line). They also asked to move a recording‑secretary stipend and position into the general fund and requested a title change for a finance deputy to “finance administrator” to reflect added responsibilities.

Budget line items: Auditor staff showed large increases in contractual and software lines versus 2024. The office reported Baker Tilly‑related charges in 2024 of roughly $121,000 and that through early September 2025 Baker Tilly charges for audit and related services had already exceeded last year’s totals. Staff presented two Baker Tilly line items for 2026 budgeting: a GAAP/compilation piece budgeted at $128,500 and accounting services at $71,500. In addition, the auditor proposed a $30,000 purchase of an Amplifund (grant seeker/compliance) system, combined with a grants compliance deputy position, creating roughly $70,000 in new grant‑related spending the office said it expects to offset by new grant revenue.

Council response and direction: Members pressed for itemized backup for large contractual increases, for clarity about which software is currently in use and which lines previously paid for software. Councilors suggested moving discretionary items (travel, conferences, stipends, some postage) out of the base general fund budget and drawing them from other more targeted funds where legally allowable. Several council members recommended trimming the auditor’s contractual services number to about $225,000 from the requested amounts pending follow‑up from the auditor’s office and external vendors.

Staff recommendations and follow‑up: Council asked auditor staff to provide detailed invoices and to confirm where existing software and contractual expenses had been paid in prior years. Staff also discussed moving a plat‑book/plat deputy salary to a plat‑book maintenance fund subject to statutory review. The council agreed to revisit remaining discretionary items and to hold some lines at zero pending confirmation that alternative funds (for example, the ineligible standard deduction fund) could legally cover specific expenses.

Why this matters: The auditor’s contractual services and software budgets are significant drivers of the year‑to‑year change and, if not constrained, could increase the county’s discretionary spending and the apparent gap that council must close to meet levy and adoption deadlines. Council members emphasized the need to avoid open‑ended engagements and to cap outside consulting where possible.