Chairman David Bennett, speaking for the Bulloch County Board of Commissioners during a public hearing, said the county faces a multimillion-dollar shortfall as it prepares the fiscal year 2026 general appropriations budget and work program. "If you look at our budget right now as it stands, we have about a $5,000,000 difference between the revenues that are coming into the county and the expenses that we have," Bennett said.

The chairman presented two contrasting budget paths: a "maintain services" proposal that keeps current services, funds a 22% across-the-board pay increase for county employees and funds 20 new public-safety positions (including eight school resource officers), and a second, leaner proposal that would allow a full millage-rate rollback by cutting positions and programs and limiting raises. "This budget includes a tax increase because we will not roll taxes back if we do this," Bennett said, summarizing the fiscal trade-off.

Why it matters: Bennett said the county has already spent roughly $13 million from its fund balance on storm recovery and has only received partial reimbursements from FEMA and GEMA. He warned that without additional revenue or significant cuts, the county must either use fund balance reserves or raise revenue. He described statutory constraints that limit local options and cited recent state legislation he said will affect local property tax calculations.

Key details

- Fund balance and reimbursements: Bennett said the county spent about $13 million from its fund balance on disaster recovery and that reimbursements from FEMA and GEMA remain outstanding. He said the county had about $20 million in fund balance before storm-related expenditures and that some reimbursements have been received but that timing is uncertain. "That money, most of it's reimbursable," he said.

- State law and House bills: Bennett described House Bill 581 (as cited in the meeting) and a subsequent House Bill 92. He said HB 581 creates a "floating homestead exemption" for qualifying properties and allows counties to seek a one-percent sales tax (FLOST) to offset property tax losses, but noted a local referendum would be required to enact FLOST and that, as presented, the earliest feasible referendum would be in November.

- Two budget options: The higher-cost budget would keep the millage rate at 11.35 mills, provide sizable pay increases and add public safety staff; Bennett said the county would need to spend roughly $22.4 million and draw on fund balance to make that work. The alternative budget would pare back hiring, cut vacant positions, reduce travel and professional services line items, and aim to preserve a full millage rollback (no tax increase), but Bennett cautioned it would mean service reductions, longer emergency response times and fewer training opportunities.

Public comment and local reaction

Speakers at the public hearing urged commissioners to consider the community impacts of cuts. John Robinson, a long-time resident, urged officials to factor "community equity" into any budget decisions, saying recreation programs provide mental-health and youth-development benefits for underserved residents. "Community equity must be the heart of our decision making," Robinson said.

Chad Averitt, a resident, praised the parks and recreation system and urged continued funding for the department’s facilities and programs. "I urge you tonight to continue to fund our parks and recreation department so that these facilities could be maintained to the standard we expect," Averitt said.

Other public commenters, including Lawton (surname provided only) and Kathy Owen, reiterated concerns about tax increases but also stressed the importance of public safety and services. Several speakers urged a more transparent line‑item review process and requested that the commission publish alternate budget proposals for public review before hearings.

Where the board stands

Commissioners did not adopt a final FY2026 budget at the hearing. Bennett said the decision was difficult and that elected officials must weigh near-term choices against longer-term fiscal risks, including capital projects such as a new jail and judicial annex that he said would affect the county’s borrowing position. "If I have to make a choice, that's what I'm gonna do," Bennett said, referring to the possibility of raising taxes to avoid service reductions.

Votes and formal actions at the meeting

- Motion to move into a public hearing on the FY2026 budget: passed unanimously (7-0). The board opened the floor to public comment but did not adopt a budget at this meeting.

What’s next

Commissioners signaled they will continue budget discussions and asked staff for further details on revenues, outstanding federal reimbursements and possible intergovernmental funding. Multiple speakers requested a public, line‑by‑line review session prior to a final vote. The board did not set a final adoption date at the hearing.

Ending

Commissioners and staff said they will work through outstanding questions about reimbursements, water‑sale revenues, and the timing of state and local actions that could alter the county’s revenue picture before presenting a final budget for adoption.