Pasco commissioners consider 0.02‑mill cut to general fund after first budget hearing

The Pasco County Board of County Commissioners on Sept. 16 discussed reducing the proposed fiscal‑year 2026 general fund millage by 0.02 mills following the first public hearing on the budget.

Budget Director Amy Farrell told commissioners the county can make the reduction by drawing partly on reserves and by pursuing department‑level cuts and operational savings during the coming year so the lower millage can be sustained without eroding long‑term reserves.

Farrell said the administration identified immediate opportunities including a 5% across‑the‑board travel reduction, reassessing certain tax‑increment allocations that subsidize road and bridge operations, and internal savings in contracts and buyback programs. County Administrator Mike [last name not specified in transcript] told the board the administration would temporarily fund the difference from reserves and then return to reduce operating budgets as savings are realized.

Commissioners discussed alternatives including a deeper cut. Commissioner Yeager said she supported additional reductions if the administration could show recurring savings. Commissioner Waitman urged caution about trimming recurring programs and recommended distinguishing “needs” from “wants.” Commissioner Mariano proposed using a one‑time reserve reduction to lower the tax bill for residents immediately if the board preferred that approach.

Farrell and the administration said larger recurring millage cuts (for example an additional 0.01 mill beyond the 0.02 discussed) would require harder choices or deferrals for recurring items such as staffing new libraries, the corrections facility, or other recurring service expansions. Farrell offered to bring back more specific line‑item options and noted the administration would avoid touching core public safety services.

The board paused the discussion for lunch and directed staff to return with more detailed options before the final budget hearings so commissioners could decide whether to adopt the 0.02 decrease the county administrator described or seek a larger cut.

Why it matters: The proposed reduction affects property tax bills for county taxpayers and must be balanced against recurring service needs and planned capital or staffing increases. Commissioners said they want to protect core services while returning savings to taxpayers where possible.

Looking ahead: Budget staff will prepare more detailed proposals for recurring versus one‑time reductions and return to the board before the final public hearings.