Meriwether County commissioners received a presentation on the proposed fiscal 2025–26 budget, which projects $24,073,322 in total revenues, during a public hearing Sept. 23; the board did not adopt the budget at the meeting.

County staff told commissioners the proposed budget shows a 12.5% increase in projected revenues over the prior year, driven in part by a $1,348,434 fund-balance carryover earmarked for the LMIC/LRA project and by property tax collections, which staff said account for about 42.47% of total revenues. "By law, we're required to have a balanced budget and what you have in front of you is a proposed budget," the presenter said, noting the county posted the required public notice in the paper and placed a copy in the courthouse lobby eight days before the hearing.

The proposal includes a 3% merit increase for employees effective Jan. 1, 2026, and six new full-time positions: one in elections, four in public works and one in code enforcement. Employee-related costs in the general fund were described as 46.12% of expenses (salaries, FICA and retirement) with insurance accounting for an additional 8.49%, which staff summarized as totaling 54.61% of general-fund expenses.

The county's fire district budget is shown separately in the proposal. Staff reported a 9.62% revenue increase for the fire district, from $2,417,026 in FY24–25 to $2,649,548 in FY25–26, and said the draft includes a $297,548 transfer from the general fund. Staff also said the fire district's recent vacancy-driven underspending reduced the need to draw that transfer in past years, but that expenses have risen as several positions were converted from part time to full time. Employee-related costs were reported at about 63.3% of the fire district budget, with insurance bringing personnel-related totals to about 71.21%.

Staff also said special funds are balanced and noted an equipment lease-purchase for in-house paving appears in those funds. The presenter said a transfer of $459,188 from the general fund is included in the proposal but that the county has not needed similar transfers in the last two years because revenues exceeded projections.

A resident who spoke during public comment expressed confusion about whether the budget had already been approved, saying, "You just approved the budget." The presenter responded that the meeting had moved into a public hearing and that the budget in front of the board was proposed and subject to the public-hearing process. The transcript records the presenter explaining the meeting order: "We have the airport authority first, the water sewer first, airport, and then IDA, and then approval of our budget."

No formal vote to adopt the 2025–26 budget is recorded in the transcript. The meeting record shows the board opened the public hearing for the proposed budget and continued with the agenda; at the end of the recorded segment commissioners moved to adjourn and the motion carried.

Discussion points recorded in the transcript focused on budget totals, the sources of revenue, personnel changes and the inclusion of transfers and carryovers; there is no record in the transcript of final approval, amendments or a vote on the proposed budget.