Newton County presents revised FY2026 proposed budget; residents urge tax restraint

Britney White, Newton County finance director, presented an updated proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 and said staff revised figures after “multiple discussions” with commissioners. The countywide budget total was presented as $145,799,561, an 8.8% increase over the prior year; White said the updated estimated millage rate is 8.6, which she said would add about $94 annually on a $300,000 home.

The revised proposal includes specific new general fund additions, White said: $3,700,000 for compensation and classification adjustments; $1,500,000 for health insurance increases; $1,750,000 for additional positions (many tied to SPLOST projects); $1,000,000 for bridge repairs and $750,000 for culvert replacements in Public Works; $245,000 for a virtual server upgrade; and a $1,100,000 debt-service payment related to an ABM energy upgrade paid to Huntington Bank. White also noted that Keep Newton Beautiful was moved from the General Fund to the Solid Waste Fund for FY2026.

The presentation called for a $4,000,000 use of fund balance, a $400,000 increase in LOST collections, and a $400,000 increase in insurance premium tax revenue. White cautioned the millage rate is estimated and depends on the final tax digest.

Why it matters: county officials must balance maintaining services with tax impacts residents will feel at the kitchen table. Commissioners and members of the public repeatedly urged the board to pare the budget and consider alternatives to increasing property taxes.

Public comments focused on tax impacts and the permanence of positions tied to SPLOST projects. Kim Shue, a Quail Valley Road resident, told commissioners, “we must maintain our current budget without any increases, or very minimal increases with a non tax impact for the upcoming fiscal year,” and asked for more citizen oversight and a biannual departmental accounting. Jennifer Dowd of Oxford said her property assessment appears to have increased “5.6%,” higher than recent market-change figures she had seen, and asked why positions tied to SPLOST were not covered by SPLOST funds.

Other commenters echoed concerns about senior taxpayers and comparisons with neighboring counties. Elena Sanders questioned comparing Newton County’s millage with smaller counties, asking, “why are we even utilizing those counties?” and said some peers use federal grants or homestead exemptions that Newton does not. Larry McSwain thanked the board for opting into HB 581 and urged the board to pursue a conservative final millage near last year’s rate; he also called for scrutiny of the county’s contract with ABM. Douglas Johnson and another resident pressed the county on seniors’ relief and communication (Johnson said the room’s speaker system makes it hard to hear the meeting).

Commissioners described continuing line-by-line reviews and said the presented figures may not be final. Commissioner Edwards said using the proposed $4,000,000 in fund balance would place the county “right at” a six-month recommended fund balance level. Commissioner Mason said staff and commissioners are reviewing prior-year expenditures “down to the penny” to find reductions and explore additional revenue such as grants and a strengthened grant-writer position. Commissioner Long said the county receives revenues that are shared with the school board—she said the school board receives “about 59%” of collected revenues before the county’s portion—and urged collaboration with the school board. Commissioner Henderson emphasized preserving core services—sheriff, fire, roads—and said staff pay and emergency response capacity influenced his budget priorities.

Formal actions and next steps: White said budget adoption is scheduled for the next regular board meeting at 7:00 a.m. on “the seventeenth” (month not specified in the record). At the meeting’s close, Commissioners Long and Edwards moved and seconded a motion to adjourn; the chair called the vote and said, “All in favor? Okay. Motion carried.”

Votes at a glance: Adjourn meeting — motion by Commissioner Long; seconded by Commissioner Edwards; outcome: approved (motion carried).

Ending: County staff and commissioners said they will continue to revise the draft before the scheduled adoption vote; White reminded the board the millage remains an estimate pending the final tax digest. Several speakers asked the board to consider further senior relief, grant-seeking, and clearer public review processes before final adoption.