Prince George County board holds budget work session, leaves tax rate at 82¢; adoption set for May 27

The Prince George County Board of Supervisors on May 21 completed a budget work session during which staff and board members agreed to a package of reductions to the proposed FY2026 county budget and kept the advertised real estate tax rate at 82 cents per $100 of assessed value, with final adoption scheduled for the board iscussion and vote on May 27.

County budget staff presented updated revenue and expenditure estimates and a spreadsheet of proposed reductions, and supervisors discussed staffing, school transfers and fire/EMS recruitment and retention. The presentation showed a net general-fund reduction of roughly $736,000 from the introduced FY2026 budget and left the advertised tax rate unchanged at 82 cents; staff will prepare the final adoptable budget based on the board—onsensus for next Tuesday nd a public hearing on the tax rate is scheduled then.

The budget presentation by Mrs. Jury, county budget staff, summarized revenue changes since the budget was introduced March 11: an estimated $673,202 reduction in general-fund revenues driven by lower local tax revenue estimates, including about $585,000 lower real-estate tax revenue than initially projected, a $350,000 reduction in public service tax revenue, and offsetting increases including a $140,000 gain in machinery and tools tax and roughly $110,000 of net changes from state comp-board funding tied to additional state-funded positions. Mrs. Jury told the board the advertised budget keeps the real-estate tax rate at 82 cents and that lowering the rate by one penny would reduce revenue by about $448,000.

Why it matters: the board ecisions shape local services and school funding while the final assessed values from the recent reassessment and incoming state funding could still change the county—iscal picture before the fiscal year begins July 1.

Key board choices and staff estimates

- Tax rate: the board reached consensus to keep the advertised rate at 82 cents per $100 of assessed value. Mrs. Jury said dropping a penny would reduce revenue by about $448,000 and affect other tax lines (public-service and manufactured-home taxes).

- General fund reductions: the presentation and spreadsheet tallied just over $736,000 in general fund reductions needed to align the budget with revised revenue estimates.

- School funding: because of revised revenue projections and increased state funding, the net local transfer to the school division was adjusted. Mrs. Jury reported the school-adopted budget figure would be $99,111,569 (she described the adopted school budget as higher than introduced because of increased state funding but lower in local funding than originally proposed). Several supervisors proposed larger reductions to the local transfer; the spreadsheet reflected alternate choices (for example, some supervisors proposed a $450,000 reduction in local school funding while others supported a smaller reduction).

- Positions and reclassifications: the board reached consensus to retain seven of the seven reclassifications included in the introduced budget (totaling just over $178,000), but supervisors agreed to eliminate some of the 16.5 positions proposed in the introduced budget. Specific consensus items included eliminating the environmental program specialist in Community Development and eliminating the deputy fire chief; the board also agreed to retain a senior planner (despite two supervisors voting to eliminate that role). The board agreed to fund a shared 0.5 FTE administrative support specialist split between the Commonwealth's Attorney and the Victim Witness Unit, and to add one comp-board-funded Deputy Circuit Court Clerk 2 with local funding shifted from contingency for the local portion.

- Fire and EMS staffing: supervisors debated staffing priorities for the fire department—or example, whether to fund a fire training captain or add an eighth firefighter/medic on the street. Several supervisors expressed concern about recruitment, retention and the cost to staff an engine on three shifts; one supervisor urged meeting with Fire Chief Holcomb to discuss operational choices.

- Contingency and capital: the board agreed to reduce the general fund contingency by $53,656, leaving a contingency for adoption of $113,971. Capital transfers for apparatus and equipment were reduced in part because the "value of a penny" used in transfer calculations declined; the capital fund for adoption was reported as roughly $1,456,000 after changes.

State funds and bonuses

Mrs. Jury told the board the General Assembly approved state-funded bonuses for school employees to be paid in June and that the school division will request the board appropriate the additional state money (likely via a June 10 agenda item). She also said state-supported local employees are eligible for a 1.5% bonus on state-funded salary after July 1 and that those costs will likely be added to the FY2026 budget as amendments once the county receives detailed guidance from state agencies.

Reassessments and revenue uncertainty

Supervisors and staff emphasized there remain moving pieces from the county ssessor nd Vision (assessment system) related to the recent reassessment. Mrs. Jury and other staff said the assessor's office used conservative estimates for new construction; if new construction values are higher than projected the county could realize additional revenue, but the final assessment numbers remain uncertain and could require amending the budget after adoption.

Next steps and public process

County staff will compile the agreed changes into a budget for adoption at the board's May 27 meeting. A public hearing on the real-estate and manufactured-home tax rate is scheduled for that meeting; staff reiterated the board may amend the budget during the fiscal year if revenues or needs change.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to adopt the meeting agenda: moved by Mr. Pugh, seconded by Mrs. Womack; roll call recorded all five supervisors voting yes. (Motion carried.)

- Motion to adjourn the budget work session: moved by Mr. Cox, seconded by Mr. Webb; roll call recorded all five supervisors voting yes. (Meeting adjourned.)

For residents: the county will post a PDF of the presentation and the spreadsheet the board used; the board plans to consider the advertised budget for adoption at its May 27 meeting following a public hearing on the tax rate.