County administrator introduces proposed FY2026 budget; commissioners flag contingency and IT capital needs
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The county administrator presented a nearly $23 million general‑fund proposed budget for fiscal 2026, calling it balanced but warning contingency is partly driven by a proposed 50% cut to the health department and noting significant capital and IT requests including radios/cameras, a software replacement, and ongoing retirement contributions.
The county administrator delivered an initial presentation of the proposed fiscal year 2026 budget, describing a balanced general fund just under $23 million and highlighting areas commissioners should watch as the process moves to department appeals and the formal adoption timeline.
The administrator said a large portion of the contingency is tied to a proposed 50% reduction to the county health department and warned commissioners not to interpret the contingency as unconstrained spending. He reiterated a previously approved additional retirement contribution of $500,000 will continue and noted that rising retirement and health‑insurance costs are drivers of future budgets.
The presentation highlighted capital and technology items: radios and cameras for public safety, a planned installment‑purchase and loan to finance Motorola equipment (with a construction fund and debt fund created to receive loan proceeds and make vendor payments), a $450,000 projected cost to replace end‑of‑life enterprise resource planning (ERP) software, network and backup solutions, Microsoft licensing replacements, and a proposal to replace 17 Ricoh copiers that have reached the end of their service life.
“The radios and the cameras are budgeted in there in the general fund,” the administrator said, and described grant and other revenue sources that may offset part of those costs, including an expected second installment of a renewable‑ready community grant linked to a solar project. He added the county has applied for at least one state grant that, if awarded, would reduce the need for general‑fund money on specific IT items.
Commissioners asked for more detail on multi‑year replacement plans and amortization approaches for technology and copiers; the administrator and IT staff said they plan to move toward replacing a portion of assets each year (20–25%) so costs are spread across multiple budgets. The administrator also recommended a new shared position between IT and the courts to strengthen security and meet audit requirements; the proposed cost would be split 60% general fund and 40% friend of the court funds.
The presentation served as an introduction; no final vote was taken. The administrator said department appeals will be scheduled and the final draft will be distributed following those meetings.