James City County proposes $389.5 million FY26 budget; schools receive partial increase, municipal center and library top CIP list

James City County Administrator Scott Stevens on Tuesday presented the county’s proposed fiscal year 2026 budget and five‑year capital improvement program (CIP), outlining operating and capital plans, projected revenue sources and next steps in the adoption schedule.

Stevens said the county’s proposed total across all funds is $389,500,000 and that the general fund — the primary operating fund that receives property and sales tax revenue — is proposed at $262,700,000, a 2.9% increase over the current year that equates to about $7.3 million in additional funding.

Stevens emphasized the budget keeps the real‑estate tax rate unchanged at 83 cents per $100 of assessed value but removes a one‑time 5‑cent tax credit that had been included in the prior year’s budget. He said removal of that credit means residents will see higher bills than last year because the credit will no longer offset assessment increases.

“We did not believe it was the right time to impose more on our community,” Stevens said when explaining why some requested items, including additional school funding and staff positions, were not recommended.

Schools and operating decisions

Cheryl McCarthy, the county’s Financial Management Services Director, said the budget proposal includes a 2.9% increase in funding to the Williamsburg‑James City County (WJCC) School Division — about $2.8 million in new county dollars — but that the school division requested roughly $105 million in local funding and the county proposal of $99.3 million leaves approximately $5.7 million of the school request unfunded. McCarthy noted the $2.9% increase mostly covers mandatory and federal‑funding transition costs: “The 2.9% increase to school funding… will only cover the mandatory increases the school is required to spend for next year,” a member of the public commented during Q&A.

The county proposes a 3% across‑the‑board employee pay increase effective July 1, with a conditional 1% in January contingent on revenue performance, and recommends funding four of 19 requested new general‑fund positions. McCarthy said personnel and education are the largest budget categories and together account for roughly 60% of the general fund.

Capital program highlights and projects

The proposed FY26 capital needs total about $104.5 million for the county over the five‑year plan period. Highlights for FY26 include continued work on a new government center (project numbers discussed during Q&A ranged near $180–$189 million in project estimates), design funding for a proposed Grosve (Grove) Community Park, continued funding for stormwater and watershed projects, a skate park at War Hill Sports Complex, a well replacement at Chickahominy Riverfront Park, and an allocation for transit stop improvements to benefit riders of the Williamsburg Area Transit Authority.

The county also included $20.8 million in school capital for FY26, including $11.3 million for preschool construction, $4.2 million for HVAC replacement at Matoaka Elementary, bus replacements, and division‑wide security and site maintenance work.

Tax and fee changes

The proposal includes no general tax rate increases but does recommend two narrow fee adjustments: aligning ambulance transport (medic) fees with Medicare reimbursement and small fee increases in some Parks & Recreation program classes whose instructor costs have increased. The county’s lodging‑tax rules remain subject to state requirements; McCarthy noted a portion must be used for tourism purposes.

Public engagement and schedule

County staff outlined the next steps: a public hearing on the FY26 proposed budget at the Board of Supervisors meeting on April 8 at 5 p.m., a board discussion during the April 22 business meeting (1 p.m., no public comment), and scheduled adoption on May 13 at 5 p.m. All meetings were listed as occurring in Building F of the Government Center on Mounts Bay Road.

Questions and concerns raised during the community meeting included whether very large capital projects such as the proposed government center should go to referendum (some residents argued referendum borrowing could yield slightly lower interest rates), continuing underfunding for competitive school compensation, and whether staffing levels in some departments could be trimmed to free operating dollars. Stevens and staff responded by reiterating fiscal constraints and the board’s options for future meetings and discussions.

Ending

County officials presented the FY26 proposal as a balanced budget that maintains the current tax rate, funds a modest employee compensation increase, prioritizes certain capital needs through borrowing and pay‑as‑you‑go allocations, and leaves open further board deliberation before adoption in May. Public hearings and board work sessions in April were scheduled to allow residents and the board to comment before final action.