Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Finance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lee County finance committee advances draft budget and levy; moves 20 Joseph E. Meyer resolutions to full board

5971390 · October 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Lee County Finance Committee voted to forward the draft budget, the proposed levy ordinance and 20 Joseph E. Meyer resolutions to the full county board, while county staff outlined property tax timing, tax-sale schedules and a plan to use public-safety tax receipts to cover bond payments.

The Lee County Finance Committee voted to send the county’s draft budget and a proposed levy ordinance to the full county board for final action and also moved 20 Joseph E. Meyer resolutions to the board agenda.

The committee acted after presentations on county revenues and expenditures and a discussion of timing for property-tax distributions and the county’s public-safety sales-tax fund. Reid Acree, presenting the monthly treasury report, told the committee the county is “right on pace with our revenue projections” and that a timing difference in property-tax receipts contributed to a larger year‑to‑date general‑fund revenue figure compared with a year earlier.

The committee’s action matters because the draft budget and levy together set next fiscal year’s spending plan and how much property owners will be asked to pay. The levy proposal would raise the county’s tax rate to 0.8242 per $100 of equalized assessed value (EAV), producing an estimated $13.03 increase on an average tax bill, the presenter said.

Treasurer’s office staff gave specifics about collection timing and the upcoming tax sale. Paul (Treasury staff) said the county’s tax sale is scheduled for Oct. 28 and described the process as “an open meeting,” adding that certified notices and publication typically prompt many delinquent accounts to pay before the sale. County staff said the county’s delinquent parcel list fell from about 1,612 in late September to below 900 as of the morning of the meeting; staff estimated roughly 400–500 parcels typically proceed to tax sale, and about 300 of those are in the Woodhaven area.

Committee members also discussed the county’s public-safety sales-tax fund and planned transfers to the general fund. The committee heard that roughly $1,750,000 is budgeted to be transferred from the public-safety fund next year, of which about $1,000,000 will cover scheduled bond payments. Committee members outlined a multi‑year approach to hold excess public-safety receipts in that fund to help meet a $1.8 million balloon payment due March 1, 2029, and to lower future annual debt service when bonds are extinguished in 2036. A bond interest range of roughly 2.5%–3% was mentioned; presenters said current investment yields in the county’s portfolios are above that range and argued against early bond repayment.

The committee approved the following procedural actions by voice vote: - Approval of the minutes from the prior committee meeting (mover: Nancy Naylor; second: Jason Anderson). - Move 20 Joseph E. Meyer resolutions to the full county board for placement on the board agenda (mover: Reid Acree; second: Nancy Naylor). - Move the draft budget ordinance to executive session for placement on the county board agenda (mover: Nancy Naylor; second: Jason Anderson). - Move the levy ordinance to executive session for placement on the county board agenda (mover: Nancy Naylor; second: Reid Acree).

Separately, Charlie Boonstra, identified in the meeting as the county’s state’s attorney, presented an annual appellate‑prosecutor resolution for the board’s consideration. Boonstra told the committee the county’s contract with the appellate prosecutor’s office will remain at $18,000 for the coming year and that the resolution establishing that arrangement will be placed on the full board agenda.

Committee members asked several clarifying questions about how sales tax and use tax interact, how much of retail development revenue flows to the county vs. municipalities, and the planned uses of public-safety funds. Committee members emphasized a conservative approach to transfers and debt management. The committee did not change the draft budget in committee; it voted to forward the documents to the county board for final consideration.

The committee chair closed the meeting after routine announcements and a warning about local scam notices that had been circulating.