Rock County administrator presents detailed 2026 recommended budget, highlights capital plan and levy pressures

Rock County Administrator Randy Light on Tuesday night presented the county administrator's recommended 2026 budget to the full Board of Supervisors, describing a larger, more-detailed budget document and outlining funding choices for initiatives, capital projects and debt. The presentation walked supervisors through a new budget-initiatives section, personnel summaries, a five-year capital improvement plan and proposed sources of funding including sales tax and borrowing.

Light said the budget document was expanded “for transparency” and that the table of contents in the printed and online versions is hyperlinked to help supervisors navigate the larger packet. He said the packet includes a foldout summary of every departmental budget initiative, with blue highlights for initiatives the administrator recommended and a far-right column estimating levy impacts.

The administrator pressed supervisors to review the capital improvement plan (CIP), which she said was included in full for the first time. The CIP lists project cost estimates and funding sources; the recommended 2026 budget proposes sales-tax funding for several projects and uses borrowing for some road projects. Kristen (last name not specified in the transcript) and other staff walked supervisors through departmental narratives, personnel summaries and the CIP detail sheets.

Light and budget staff told the board that the public-works fund carries a deficit and that the 2026 recommendation includes using sales tax to pay down part of that deficit and choosing borrowing instead of sales tax to finance some road work. Specifically, the presentation states a plan to apply roughly $3.2 million of sales-tax funds in 2026 to reduce the public works deficit as part of a multiyear paydown, and to use borrowing to finance some road projects. Staff also described a strategy to fund equipment purchases with sales tax.

Staff highlighted several capital requests recommended for sales-tax funding, including an IT laptop/desktop refresh and server replacement, and public safety radio replacements in the sheriff’s office. The packet includes a list of unfunded projects so supervisors can see other departmental asks that were not recommended. Staff said some capital items are being recommended for sales-tax funding while others are not recommended.

Light and Finance staff also described schedule and appendix changes: the packet includes detailed PO3 line-item schedules that will be added online and handed out in print at the meeting, and a capital plan appendix with 2026–2030 project summaries. Staff said the administrator worked with the county’s financial advisor to smooth future debt service estimates to approximately $12.4 million annually.

Why it matters: The administrator’s recommended budget sets the starting point for committee-level review and the fall public hearing and adoption process. The packet groups department narratives, personnel and initiatives to help supervisors evaluate priority tradeoffs; staff said some of the choices — including whether to use sales tax, levy or borrowing for particular projects — will be decided later in committee and by the board.

Board members asked about how sales-tax reductions and borrowing would affect long-term debt and operating costs, and staff said borrowing approvals happen later in the process and require a separate supermajority vote to issue debt. Administrator Light told the board that if borrowing authorizations later fail, the budget would need amendment to identify alternate cuts or revenue sources. Staff also said that a mill-rate change from the recommended budget would be small if property values do not change.

Next steps: The administrator said printed PO3 (line-item) detail sheets will be added to the online packet and provided to supervisors, and that committees will work through departmental budgets in the coming weeks. The board did not take a formal vote on the full budget at this meeting; the administrator’s recommended budget will be considered in committee and at future full-board sessions before final adoption.

Ending: Staff asked supervisors to submit follow-up questions; administration committed to circulate written answers to supervisors when available.