Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Polk County proposes $3.465 billion FY25–26 tentative budget, sets tentative millage and schedules Sept. 15 final hearing
Summary
County Manager and budget staff presented the proposed FY25–26 tentative budget totaling $3,464,631,333, described program and capital priorities, proposed a countywide tentative millage of 6.6348 mills (4.3% over the rollback rate) and adopted the tentative budget and millage; the board set a final public hearing for Sept. 15, 2025 at 6 p.m.
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Polk County Board of County Commissioners reviewed and tentatively adopted the county’s FY25–26 budget and set the statutorily required tentative millage rates and final hearing date.
County Manager Beasley and Kristia Johnson, director of Polk County Budget and Management Services, presented the proposed $3,464,631,333 balanced tentative budget and explained major revenue and expense drivers. The presentation stressed population-driven service demands, capital projects and workforce needs; staff proposed preserving the countywide general fund millage, indexing select fees and assessments, and using one-time funds for capital projects.
Kristia Johnson described the budget’s scale and makeup: the total proposed budget is $3,464,631,333 and the proposed general fund budget is $726,000,000, an 11.1% increase over the current year. Johnson told the board the countywide property-value change is 8.83% and the unincorporated area change is 6.69%. She said the county budgets anticipated ad valorem revenues at 95% for planning but that the public‑hearing script requires reading 100% figures into the record.
The proposed tentative countywide operating millage rate presented by staff is 6.6348 mills, a 4.3% increase over the calculated rollback rate of 6.3607 mills. Staff presented tentative millage rates for the county’s MSTUs: Parks MSTU 0.5286 mills (no change from adopted 24–25 but 3.8% over its rollback rate), Library MSTU 0.1985 mills, Stormwater MSTU 0.0941 mills and the Rancho Benito MSTU 9.1272 mills. Staff also provided revenue estimates tied to the rollback comparisons. The board moved, seconded and approved the tentative millage rates by voice vote.
Johnson described capital and staffing highlights: a five‑year capital improvement plan totaling about $1.9 billion, with $793.1 million included in the FY25–26 proposed budget; a listing of 191 new positions in the tentative budget and current position count rising from the prior peak to 2,426 with a projected 2,617 after proposed additions. The proposed budget includes a 4% employee salary increase effective Oct. 1 and no increase in employee health‑insurance premiums for the fourth consecutive year. Staff also said the budget includes one-time funding of roughly $68.4 million allocated to capital projects and a $2 million contingency reserve for projects.
Staff noted program-level impacts: maintaining investments in public safety, public health, transportation, stormwater, environmental stewardship, behavioral health and affordable housing; indexing selected fees and assessments to avoid larger periodic increases; and raising residential solid-waste assessments (the solid-waste residential assessment increase presented as $8.84). Johnson said nearly two-thirds of general fund operating expenses fund sheriffs, constitutional officers and related mandates, and roughly 32% supports Board of County Commissioners programs with 43% of that portion directed to public safety programs.
Three members of the public spoke during the budget hearing. Mark Platts of Eagle Lake asked whether the capital plan was “front‑end loaded” and whether the divisions expect more spending in the early years; staff replied the CIP timing depends on project execution and that some divisions anticipate earlier project schedules. Resident Daniel Wolf questioned whether most residential property owners will see tax increases; staff responded that the public‑hearing format is not a question-and-answer session and referred school‑millage questions to the school board because the school millage is set by a different elected body.
After the presentation and public comment, the board adopted the staff recommendation to set the tentative millage rates and to adopt the fiscal year 25–26 tentative budgets: $3,464,631,333 countywide; Parks MSTU $46,013,519; Library MSTU $12,074,224; Stormwater MSTU $14,370,652; Rancho Benito MSTU $67,564. The board set the second (final) public hearing to adopt a final millage rate and budget for Sept. 15, 2025, at 6 p.m. in the Commission Boardroom.
Ending
The board closed the hearing after brief public comment, thanked staff for their work and adjourned for the evening.
