Bedford County commissioners review draft operating budget that aims to avoid a tax increase

Bedford County commissioners reviewed a draft county operating budget that includes a 3% cost-of-living adjustment for employees and an annual step program while seeking to avoid a property tax increase.

Finance staff described the draft as focused on “housekeeping” costs needed to sustain county operations: the proposed 3% cost-of-living adjustment is estimated at about $700,000, and an annual step program adds roughly $240,000. The draft also reflects a 7.7% increase in health insurance premiums and several reclassifications and one-time transfers to capital projects, including funds for sheriff vehicles, fire department equipment and school capital needs. The presentation noted that these baseline operating changes absorb roughly $2 million of the county’s available growth before considering new recurring positions.

Why it matters: the draft will determine whether the county can maintain current services and address selected capital needs without asking voters for a tax increase. Commissioners and staff said the plan preserves operating stability but does not fund all departmental requests.

Key items and exclusions - Included: a 3% cost-of-living adjustment for staff; annual step increases; funding for required increases in utilities, software and contracted services; and one-time transfers from debt service into capital accounts for vehicles and equipment. - Not included: recurring requests for additional sworn deputies and multiple new firefighter positions; nonprofit funding increases requested by some groups were also not included. - Capital and debt: the draft lists specific capital transfers for sheriff vehicles, solid waste compactors and school capital projects; staff said some capital items are funded from one-time transfers and capital project reserves.

Process and next steps Finance staff said they will publish a budget book to the commissioners before next week’s work session so members can review details in advance. Commissioners scheduled additional study time and an informal question session to review the numbers and the county’s debt schedule before the final commission vote.

The presentation urged commissioners to prioritize between recurring personnel increases and one-time capital needs; staff repeatedly noted that foregone personnel investments would reduce recurring costs but could leave departments understaffed.

Ending Commissioners directed finance staff to prepare the budget book and return with detailed debt schedules and the capital plan for the next work session so the commission can take action at a subsequent meeting.