Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delaware County reviews 2026 budget projections, ARP interest restrictions and a 2% pay request
Summary
County officials reviewed year-end and 2026 operating-balance projections, agreed to remove a sheriff giveback from a list of adjustments, discussed constraints on $300,000 in ARP interest funds and debated a 2% salary request, with several officials warning of larger shortfalls in 2027.
During a Delaware County budget meeting, officials reviewed year-end and 2026 operating-balance projections, discussed $244,008.48 in county-general givebacks after a sheriff correction, and clarified that roughly $300,000 in American Rescue Plan (ARP) interest cannot be transferred directly into the county general fund.
The discussion began with a budget staff member correcting the givebacks list, saying a sheriff item — referred to in the meeting as $20,000 — should be removed and that "that changes the total county general givebacks to $244,008.48." The budget staff member and other finance presenters also reported a projected year-end balance in the roughly $6.04 million range for 2026, though participants at times read different line items aloud while reconciling figures.
Tanya, a department head, said she had contacted the Indiana State Board of Accounts for guidance on how interest earned on ARP funds may be used. "The money will not be able to be directly transferred into the county general fund," Tanya said. She said the interest could be spent only from the fund where it currently sits or used for allowable expenses in that fund, not moved outright into general operations.
Officials also raised a media report attributed to "Mr. Hughes," asking whether a state payment reported in that article — described in the meeting as about $216,000 in back amounts due from the state — had already been included in the county's revenue projections. The presiding official asked the budget team whether that amount was reflected in the revenue forms; budget staff indicated it should already be accounted for.
A request submitted on behalf of an absent elected official, Ed, proposed a 2% salary increase for the requesting office totaling $10,963 (listed in the meeting as $9,224 gross pay, $706 FICA and $1,033 per perf). Meeting participants debated whether to circulate the proposal for review; council members repeatedly expressed concern about setting a precedent for raises while the county faces operating-balance pressures.
Jim, a council member, urged caution about relying on the operating balance to cover recurring shortfalls. "I'm glad it's over, but I'm not real happy how it ended," Jim said in a lengthy comment. He described a hypothetical scenario in which dipping repeatedly into reserves or a retirement account to cover annual shortfalls would only postpone larger funding problems in 2027. Several council members echoed that concern, noting the county could face larger deficits next year if structural changes are not made now.
Tanya said the final ARP-interest figure could reduce the visible operating balance on the county's general-fund page, even though the money exists in a different fund. That prompted council members to accept proceeding with the numbers as presented while retaining the option to make further corrections before a formal budget adoption at the next meeting.
No formal votes or final budget adoption occurred during this session. The presiding official closed the meeting by scheduling a recess until Tuesday.
The meeting record shows substantive clarifications about how ARP interest may be expended, a budget reconciliation between staff and elected officials, and a payroll request forwarded by an absent official for further review.
