Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Revenue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Amelia County staff say nearly $1 million of additional revenue shows in FY26 draft budget; board asks for ongoing verification
Summary
County finance staff told the Board of Supervisors that revised FY26 projections include roughly $1 million more revenue than prior estimates, driven by interest income, higher charges for services and insurance/ambulance billing; supervisors asked staff to continue monthly monitoring and to document sources.
Amelia County finance staff told the Board of Supervisors during an April budget workshop that the draft FY26 budget reflects roughly $1 million more in revenue than last year’s published figures, a change staff said results mainly from stronger-than-expected interest earnings, higher charges for services and one-time transfers carried forward.
The increase is not the result of any single new tax; Pon, a county finance presenter, told the board she arrived at the higher number by reviewing multiple years of actual collections and “adjusting the estimated FY26 revenue estimate based on the current trend and the actual information to date.” She said use-of-money-and-property revenue rose in the draft by about 148 percent relative to the prior budget line because actual interest collections in recent years exceeded prior budget assumptions. “This is why we came up with the number,” she said.
Why it matters: supervisors said confidence in the new revenue baseline is important because it underpins spending decisions and possible tax-rate choices for FY26. Supervisor Todd summarized the board’s concern: the county is “approaching a million dollars of additional revenue,” so accuracy matters for planning and for public transparency.
Supporting details and staff checks
- Ambulance billing: Pon said the county incorporated an expected $75,000 increase to ambulance-billing revenue after consulting with Fire & Emergency Services and staff.
- Sheriff vacancy savings: staff included an estimate of about $21,977 tied to payroll vacancies in the sheriff’s office; the figure represents estimated salary savings carried forward and treated as available in FY26.
- Charges for services and parks & rec: charges for services were shown higher in part because parks-and-recreation revenues were already above budget year-to-date; year-to-date figures for FY25 were cited to justify a higher FY26 projection.
Board direction and uncertainty
Board members repeatedly asked for documentation. Several supervisors said they wanted monthly monitoring and clearer line-item detail so the board and the public could see which funds produce the higher collections. Pon agreed to continue tracking trends month to month and to provide supporting spreadsheets and line-item crosswalks.
What remains unresolved
Supervisors pressed staff on some line items (for example, mineral collections and how specific user-fee lines were estimated). In several cases Pon said she used actual recent collections where estimates were uncertain and noted she would follow up with the relevant elected officials or departments. No formal budget decisions or rate changes were adopted at the workshop.
Ending
The board asked staff to return with more documentation and a month-by-month monitoring plan before finalizing advertised rates or sending the budget to public hearing.
