Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County administrator presents FY26 budget preview and CIP priorities; board to schedule follow‑up work sessions
Summary
County administrator Matthew Smolnick presented a first look at the proposed FY26 operating budget and the capital improvement plan, flagged items including turf replacement and voting‑machine purchases, and recommended budget work sessions so supervisors can review department requests line‑by‑line before adoption.
County administrator Matthew Smolnick presented an initial FY26 operating budget and the proposed capital improvement plan (CIP), described staff recommendations and urged the Board of Supervisors to schedule work sessions to review departmental requests.
Smolnick described the budget presentation as a starting point and said the package published for the public includes department‑level requests and a transparency column explaining individual line items. He said the packet reflects no proposed increase to the county real‑estate tax rate (kept at $0.68) or the personal property rate ($3.25) and that his recommendation for the CIP and operating budget results in a balanced proposal.
Key capital items called out for FY25‑26 included: turf replacement at King George High School ($866,109 in the CIP spreadsheet), a proposed King George Middle School catwalk repair ($87,160), replacement of an ambulance ($400,000), a proposed metal storage building for the sheriff ($800,000 recommended), and replacement voting machines for the Northern Neck regional purchase (vendor total $155,000; the county’s FY26 share is one half of that amount and the vendor confirmed the group price will still apply if the purchase is split across two fiscal years). Smolnick recommended funding a smaller set of sheriff vehicle replacements (six units) rather than adding additional patrol vehicles tied to new positions.
Board members questioned several items and asked for more detail in a number of budget lines: maintenance and replacement schedules for school turf and stadium seating, whether a reserve or rental revenue could offset turf replacement costs, the county’s history of setting aside funds for turf replacement, and school district requests including bus replacements. Supervisors requested a specific estimate for bleacher seating expansion, and asked staff to produce cost options. Supervisors also asked the school division to provide a granular breakdown of the fiscal impact of a 3% cost‑of‑living adjustment (COLA), absorption of health‑insurance increases and the 5‑to‑10‑year compression issue for teacher pay.
Smolnick recommended scheduling two budget work sessions (retreats) over the coming weeks so the board can question department heads directly; supervisors asked staff to send a scheduling poll to find suitable dates. Smolnick also provided guidance on how a change in the real‑estate rate would translate into revenue (a penny equals about $408,914 at a 98% collection rate) and said final adoption would follow public hearings in April and May.
No final budget adoption occurred; supervisors directed staff to schedule the sessions and to return with requested cost estimates on turf replacement, potential bleacher expansion, bus replacement counts and the school‑pay compression and benefits numbers for planning.
