Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Taxation And Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Mathews County board sets 10¢ tax‑rate advertisement after heated budget work session

3675584 · March 27, 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

Facing a projected shortfall, the Mathews County Board of Supervisors voted to advertise a 10¢ tax rate for the required public hearing while continuing work on cuts across departments.

After hours of budget deliberations on March 26, the Mathews County Board of Supervisors voted to set a 10‑cent tax‑rate advertisement for the public hearing required under Virginia law, while continuing work to reduce a projected FY‑26 shortfall.

Motion and vote: Supervisor Jones moved to advertise the tax rate at 10¢ and Supervisor Jones (seconding for procedural reasons as recorded) seconded. The board recorded the roll call as: Butler — Aye; Phillips — Aye; Walls — Nay; Jones — Aye; Dawes — Aye. The motion carried.

Why the board advertised a higher rate: Budget staff warned that if the board did not use a conservative (higher) rate for the advertisement the county could not legally raise it later; staff noted the advertised rate can be lowered before final adoption but cannot be raised. Supervisors said they want time after the advertisement to sharpen cuts and return a lower recommended rate by the final adoption. The budget debate covered multiple departments — IT, schools, sheriff, fire and rescue, parks, library and others — and supervisors said more line‑by‑line scrutiny was needed.

Other formal action: Early in the meeting the board added a closed‑session agenda item concerning legal advice on property at 384 Old Fairway Road and entered closed session under Virginia Code § 2.2‑3711(a)(8) for attorney consultation. The board announced the closed‑session topic and returned from closed session later with no public action recorded in open session on that item.

Budget shortfall context: Staff repeatedly emphasized the size of the gap and said the largest single driver of county demand is the requested school transfer; the board discussed a mix of cuts — including proposed reductions to special events, some community organization support, and suggested reallocation of part‑time to contracted positions in the sheriff’s budget — to lower the rate for final adoption. Supervisors also discussed the potential need for debt financing for capital projects (fire station and school repairs) and the likely effect on debt service if the county borrows for facilities.

Next steps and timing: The board scheduled a public hearing process and said staff will continue to refine numbers for the next meeting and to solicit further input from departments. By law the proposed budget and advertised tax rates must be available before the public hearing and final adoption by early May; board members said they expect to return with revised figures and possible further cuts before final adoption.