Pulaski County commissioners voted to advertise preliminary budgets for multiple county departments and made several line-item adjustments during a lengthy budget workshop.
The board approved advertising the sheriff’s budget, the county treasurer’s budget, the recorder’s budget, the maintenance and elections budgets, and several smaller offices after brief discussion and motions to approve each department’s advertised figures. In most cases the board voted “aye” and carried the motion to publish the budgets for public notice.
Commissioners and staff repeatedly emphasized that advertising the budgets does not constitute final adoption; line items may be changed before the scheduled public hearing and final adoption. Multiple commissioners noted they preferred to advertise higher or conservative figures in some funds to preserve flexibility and avoid additional meetings later in the cycle.
During the session the board adjusted or reduced several specific line items: one department’s consulting or marketing funds were reduced, a $25,000 line for an outside program (noted on the record as "Freedom therapy"/similar line) was reduced to $20,000 by consensus, and an opioid-related line item that had little recent spending was set to zero with the option for departments to request funds later if needed.
A commissioner summarized the board’s approach: advertise broadly now to meet statutory publishing requirements and return to make cuts or reallocations before adoption if necessary. The board also discussed how some restricted funds (riverboat, cumulative building, special projects) have particular allowable uses — e.g., courthouse lease payments and structure repairs — and confirmed they will preserve those allocations.
A roll-call-style vote was taken for the sheriff’s budget advertising. The chairman called for those in favor; commissioners responded “Aye,” and the motion carried. Similar procedural votes carried for treasurer, recorder, soil and water, maintenance, elections, veterans service, auditors and other departmental budgets later in the meeting.
The board repeatedly asked staff to provide clearer documentation where questions arose, including the source of funds for items identified as coming from fund 11/12 instead of county general, and to confirm whether particular items (for example, fair premium payments or security costs at the Justice Center) are already budgeted elsewhere.
Next steps: the county will publish the advertised budgets and schedule the public hearing required by statute in September; commissioners said they will review and amend items as needed before final adoption.