Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Budget Levy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners review 2026 preliminary budget; staff propose 7.1% levy with board discussion about reserves and options

5793659 · September 3, 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

Administrator Kelsey Baker presented a revised 2026 preliminary budget showing a proposed 7.1% levy increase, a discussion point among commissioners who suggested leaving flexibility through December or returning to an 8% cushion; staff emphasized reserve levels (8.5 months of coverage for 2023 audited numbers) and the need to balance

County Administrator Kelsey Baker and Chief Financial Officer Karen Anderson reviewed the 2026 preliminary budget with the board on Sept. 2 and proposed a preliminary levy increase of 7.1 percent. Baker said staff increased some software licensing costs and planned to draw slightly more from jail revenue reserves to offset budget pressures while avoiding heavy use of landfill reserves used recently to purchase property.

Baker noted the county’s 2023 audited figures showed roughly 8.5 months of cash coverage and said 2024 audit numbers (finalizing in the fall) will alter that calculation; she recommended a cautious approach to reserve use and described the board’s recent building‑space analysis and potential future bond considerations.

Commissioners debated whether to set a preliminary levy at 7.1% or leave more “wiggle room” and carry an 8% preliminary figure into the fall; some commissioners favored the higher preliminary levy to avoid being caught if state or federal changes add costs later, while others urged trying to reduce the levy further and to use reserves judiciously. Baker and CFO Anderson said they would refine numbers and present a final figure at the special meeting scheduled Sept. 23 for preliminary levy approval.

No final levy vote was taken; the board scheduled a special meeting Sept. 23 to set the preliminary levy and encouraged commissioners to bring follow‑up questions to staff before that meeting.