Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners review FY2026 draft budget; staff identify $5.7 million shortfall and surface allocation options
Summary
County budget staff told Kent County commissioners the FY2026 draft shows roughly $2.3 million in new revenue against $72.736 million in requested expenditures, leaving an approximately $5.7 million shortfall to be addressed during upcoming work sessions.
County staff presented a high‑level FY2026 revenue and expenditure summary and walked commissioners through allocation requests from local partner agencies, then sought direction on trimming requests.
Shelly (budget staff) reported the draft revenue summary showed about $2,300,000 in new revenue for the coming year, while the expenditure summary totaled about $72,736,000—leaving roughly a $5,700,000 gap that will need to be addressed during the budget process.
Staff and commissioners reviewed allocation requests line by line. Major items discussed included the health department (staff noted the county’s share depends on state core‑funding formulas and an April 10 update was expected), the public library, Upper Shore Aging (meals program and state funding changes), Delmarva Community Services transit request, and several small nonprofits and town requests. Several partners had asked to use fund balance or one‑time contingency funds for capital or equipment purchases in FY2025; staff reminded commissioners that one‑time funding decisions can be treated differently than recurring operating increases.
On specific allocation choices the commissioners directed staff to: remove proposed new positions from partner requests where appropriate, align partner salary increases to the county employee salary change (the board indicated a 4% placeholder for county employees but discussed leaving final salary action until later), ask partners to use fund balance for one‑time equipment where feasible (examples: library security cameras), and keep several partner allocations flat while revisiting high‑priority items. Commissioners also asked staff to produce subtotals excluding one‑time town requests so the board can see a clearer recurring‑cost picture.
Ending: No formal funding votes were taken. Commissioners scheduled further budget work sessions and a full day for budgets on the fifth Tuesday block noted in the calendar; they asked staff for more detail on a handful of partner items (health department formula update, library rent and insurance cost‑share, transit cost allocation comparisons) ahead of the next meeting.
