Mathews County supervisors confront $1.46 million FY26 shortfall; schools funding, firehouse rehab, library cuts debated

Mathews County Board of Supervisors members met to review the draft fiscal 2026 budget, identifying a remaining shortfall of $1,456,005.92 and debating school funding levels, a proposed rehabilitation agreement with a volunteer fire department and targeted departmental cuts.

Board members said the group began FY26 budget work from a much larger request and have trimmed multiple line items; the board’s current draft still shows a roughly $1.46 million deficit. Supervisor (name provided in transcript as) Mr. Jones outlined additions and reductions he had made to the draft and described a separate proposal to contract with the volunteer fire department for a staged rehab of an old fire station.

Why it matters: the board signaled that closing the gap likely will require either new real-estate tax revenue or further reductions in services or capital plans. Supervisors described the county’s heavy reliance on property tax revenue and warned that additional operating or capital demands for schools and public safety would increase pressure on taxpayers.

Most important facts

• Shortfall: Supervisors reported a remaining gap of $1,456,005.92 in the FY26 draft after the latest round of additions and cuts.

• Schools funding: The board discussed the school division’s funding request and state figures. The transcript records a schools request of $10,091,005.41 previously proposed by the school division and at least one board member recording a reduction to $9,000,000 in the county’s draft. A board member said the state’s reported contribution figure is approximately $5,900,000 but noted that the county had not yet verified that number and asked staff to confirm the state calculation before the next meeting.

• MOU and maintenance: Supervisors said the county and schools were still negotiating a memorandum of understanding (MOU) tied to school-maintenance spending; the board requested the MOU be finalized and available for the next regular meeting so supervisors could vote on it.

• Firehouse rehab proposal: Mr. Jones (identified in the transcript) proposed an agreement that would provide up to $3,000,000 to a volunteer fire department to rehabilitate an old station, with staged payments tied to construction progress and performance bonds. He said the arrangement would allow volunteers to manage much of the work and could save the county an estimated $3–4 million in projected debt service compared with an alternative county-led project.

• Departmental changes and cuts: Supervisors described adding back some public-safety items (combined fire and rescue funding), restoring a line for sheriff’s salaries, returning a $35,000 allocation for the YMCA, and restoring other smaller line items. Reductions included trimming IT contract amounts (the contract cited was reduced from $120,000 to $60,000 in the draft), cuts to equipment-replacement and other departmental budgets, and a proposed $82,000 cut to the library bottom line (later described by a board member as reduced to $60,000 or lower in specific lines).

Quotes from meeting participants

• Mr. Jones (Board member): “I would like to see that we get an agreement with him plug them up to $3,000,000. … We will set up an agreement with them … As a progress. Yeah. We will set up an agreement with them that's that's that's right side.”

• Miss Phillips (Board member): “I have been the proponent of our schools, and I do believe that schools are our economic drivers for our community. … Cutting that library is very hard for me to see. I believe that library is truly a gem.”

Board context and next steps

Supervisors repeatedly framed the gap in terms of real-estate tax pressure. One supervisor noted the county’s higher dependence on property taxes compared with neighboring localities and sketched potential future tax impacts (discussed as cents per $100 of assessed value) if capital needs for schools proceed without alternative revenues. Board members asked staff to verify state school contribution calculations, to provide updated student-performance and compensation data, and to finalize the schools’ MOU so the board could consider it at its next regular meeting.

Ending

No formal votes on the overall budget were recorded in the transcript excerpt; the meeting continued to other agenda items after supervisors completed the budget discussion. Staff were asked to supply the requested data and the final draft MOU so the board could address remaining open questions at its next meeting.