Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Supplement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lane County adopts FY 2025–26 supplemental budget resolution
Summary
The Lane County Board of Commissioners unanimously approved Resolution 25092301, adopting the first supplemental budget for fiscal year 2025–26 to move project funds, reflect updated grant reimbursements and reduce staffing tied to grant expirations.
The Lane County Board of Commissioners on Sept. 23 adopted Resolution 25092301, approving the fiscal year 2025–26 supplemental budget No. 1 to make, reduce and transfer appropriations across county funds.
The hearing and vote followed a staff presentation explaining the largest changes. “So as noted, this is our first supplemental,” said Christine Moody, budget and financial planning manager, who and a budget analyst reviewed adjustments including staffing changes, project timing and new reimbursements.
Moody told the board the District Attorney’s Office will lose 2.5 full‑time equivalent positions because a victim‑advocate grant will end and health and human services will reduce roughly 8–15 FTEs in public health because of planned funding end dates. She also said the capital projects fund will increase more than 10% in expenditures because of timing and the need to move project money forward; parks will receive some FEMA reimbursements from an ice storm.
The public hearing was conducted per Oregon law, with Moody noting the hearing was required under ORS 294.471 and ORS 294.473 because one or more funds were changing expenditures by more than 10% from budgeted amounts. No members of the public signed up to speak on the supplemental budget.
Vice Chair Seneca moved to approve the resolution; Commissioner Buck seconded. Chair David Lovell called the vote and the board recorded the motion as passed 5–0.
Why it matters: supplemental budgets amend the adopted spending plan to reflect real‑world changes — grants that end, reimbursements that arrive, or capital projects that shift between years. Changes to grant‑funded staff and capital timing can affect service levels and project delivery across county departments.
What the board directed next: staff answered a commissioner question clarifying that the 2.5 FTE reduction in the District Attorney’s Office was the result of a federal victim‑advocate grant ending. No further board direction was recorded at the meeting; commissioners did not remove the item from consent and took no separate action beyond adoption of the resolution.
Votes at a glance
- Resolution 25092301 (Adopt FY 2025–26 supplemental budget No. 1, making, reducing, and transferring appropriations): Moved by Vice Chair Seneca; seconded by Commissioner Buck. Outcome: approved 5–0.
(Full motion text in county packet; the public hearing notice cited ORS 294.471 and ORS 294.473.)
The board thanked budget staff for the work of preparing the supplemental package and moved on to other agenda items.
