Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Codington County adopts 2026 provisional budget; raises jail capital-project allocation
Summary
The Codington County Board of Commissioners adopted the 2026 provisional budget and accompanying levy resolution, increasing the bond redemption amount and raising the jail capital project fund after a guaranteed maximum price was finalized. The board also approved related construction claims at the meeting.
The Codington County Board of Commissioners on Sept. 23 adopted the county's 2026 provisional budget and accompanying levy resolution (2025-13), including an upward revision to the bond redemption fund and a larger capital-project allocation for the county jail.
The board voted to adopt the 2026 provisional budget with amendments after a motion by Commissioner Gable and a second by Commissioner McElhaney. The motion passed on a voice vote; commissioners present answered “aye” and the chair declared the motion carried.
The board amended two line items as part of the adoption: increasing the bond redemption fund to $2,406,062 (from the figure shown in the published provisional budget) and raising the capital project fund amount for the jail to $23,212,117, reflecting the guaranteed maximum price the board finalized the previous week. The levy resolution tied to the provisional budget was identified in the meeting as Resolution 2025-13.
During the claims portion of the meeting the board separately approved invoices related to the jail build. Commissioners approved a packet of claims for the jail project that included a geotechnical engineering invoice and investor-services work for bond issuance; the board read the amounts into the record as roughly $3,000 for geotechnical work and $37,500 for investor services, for a combined total reported in the meeting of about $40,009. The board took the motion to approve those jail-related claims together and carried it without recorded opposition.
County officials said the capital project increase follows their acceptance of a guaranteed maximum price from the construction team and reflects work already under way at the site.
The board also handled routine procedural items immediately before and after the budget vote, including approving the meeting agenda and the Sept. 16 minutes.
The county auditor was asked to incorporate the approved changes into the budget documents and to collect signatures as required by county procedures.
Commissioner Gable later gave a construction update in the meeting's commissioner-comments portion, saying owner–architect–contractor (OAC) meetings occur every two weeks and that groundwork and site preparation are underway. He said the contractor had set up an on-site office and was preparing for foundation work subject to weather and site conditions.
Votes at the meeting were taken by voice and recorded as carried when all present answered “aye.” No roll-call vote with individual member votes was read into the record for the budget adoption.
The board plans to sign the approved budget documents and submit required paperwork according to county practice.
