Benton County commission adopts 2025–26 budget, sets certified tax rate at 1.7066

The Benton County Commission voted to approve the fiscal 2025–26 budget and set the county'wide certified tax rate at 1.7066 during a public meeting called to consider the budget. Commissioners also approved a separate resolution allocating modest funds to local nonprofit and volunteer organizations.

The certified tax rate of 1.7066 was presented as revenue-neutral for the county and tied to a recent mass reappraisal; commissioners voted to adopt that rate by roll call. The commission then approved the appropriation resolution that funds county departments, offices and agencies for the year beginning July 1, 2025.

Why it matters: The reappraisal mailed to property owners earlier in the year prompted discussion about sticker shock and individual tax bills; adopting a revenue-neutral certified rate is intended to preserve government revenues while offsetting increases from higher property assessments. The meeting recorded multiple questions from commissioners and the public about specific budget items including county-owned property, capital projects and nonprofit funding.

Commissioners debated several items before the final votes. Commissioner Rocky Preston criticized a recent positive newspaper article and questioned whether the press coverage had improperly influenced the process, saying the coverage left unanswered questions about intent and whether anyone in county government had requested the piece. Preston also asked about the sheriff's requested deputy positions and the jail's budget figures.

Commissioner Fowler and others raised objections tied to a prior purchase of a bank building. "I'm not voting for this budget because this building was bought illegally," Fowler said, asserting that the property had not cleared state and local code review when it was acquired. Fowler said the purchase and the financing terms raised procedural and transparency concerns. Several commissioners said questions about the building's purchase and related contracts were background context for their votes but did not prevent them from voting on the budget document that had been published for the public.

Multiple commissioners expressed concern about line items and funding levels elsewhere in the budget. Topics mentioned during discussion included: - Volunteer program funding: Commissioners noted the volunteer program was allocated $2,000 in the budget book despite a history of larger grants, and some commissioners urged a future amendment to restore prior funding levels. - Highway and capital projects: Commissioners questioned a large capital allocation for the highway department and other capital-line items and asked staff where line-item details were listed in the packet. - Broadband and airport funds: Commissioners discussed multi-year broadband appropriations and several airport revenue assumptions; staff said some figures would roll into capital project accounts and that revenue estimates reflected expected future rates and sales. - Employee compensation: Commissioners discussed a proposed cost-of-living increase, step raises, and a small number of employees whose pay would need administrative corrections after the budget passed.

Votes at a glance - Resolution 1 (Appropriations for county funds, departments, institutions, offices and agencies for fiscal 07/01/2025–06/30/2026): Approved. (Recorded roll call: DeCarol, Clark Davis, Kenneth Miller, Greg Burke, Bill Melton, Jerry Holland, Mark Nunn — yes; David Vine, Martin Preston, Wayne Ballard, Sunny Hall — no; motion recorded as passed.) - Resolution 2 (Fixing the tax levy for Benton County at 1.7066): Approved by roll call; the resolution passed with a majority of commissioners voting yes. - Resolution 3 (Appropriations to nonprofit charitable organizations for 07/01/2025–06/30/2026): Approved; commissioners were told the volunteer-group allocation could be amended at a later regular meeting if the commission chose.

What the commission said about procedure: Multiple members and staff emphasized that the budget document had been published in advance and that the standard procedure is to vote to approve or reject the published document at the called meeting; amendments to the budget, commissioners were told, must generally follow after passage or via a subsequent resolution in a regular meeting.

Public participation and tone: The meeting included public comments at the outset and detailed questioning by commissioners during the floor debate. At times discussion grew contentious over the volunteer program funding and the bank building purchase, with several commissioners requesting follow-up information or future resolutions to amend the budget.

What happens next: With the certified tax rate and appropriation resolutions approved, staff said the county will complete the reappraisal process and finalize levy and billing schedules. Commissioners who objected to particular line items were advised they may bring separate resolutions at a later regular meeting to amend specific allocations (for example, to restore volunteer program funding).