Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sedgwick County forecast: recurring revenue up but a proposed state 3% cap could turn surpluses into deficits
Summary
County budget staff says the updated forecast shows recurring revenues largely covering recurring expenses for 2026–2030, but single‑year projects and a possible state property‑tax cap could push county tax funds into deficits without policy choices or added revenues.
Sedgwick County budget staff told commissioners on March 12 that an updated budget forecast shows a positive near‑term picture but significant long‑term risks if the state adopts a 3% assessed‑value cap. Lorraine, the county’s budget director, presented the forecast and said staff built 5% assessed‑value capture into 2026 and 5% in outer years only as a planning assumption; the forecast also treats most extra investment income above a $6.5 million long‑term baseline as one‑time revenue.
The presentation said the county’s 2024 revised budget authority was about $642 million with actual expenses of roughly $562.6 million, leaving nearly $80 million in unspent budget authority across funds. That cushion and recent revenue gains enabled staff to eliminate a structural imbalance that showed about $4.9 million in recurring shortfall a year earlier, staff said.
Why it matters: staff framed this as an early step in the 2026 budget process. Board members will use the forecast, department decision packages and public input to set priorities before the county manager releases a recommended budget July 9 and commissioners adopt a final budget (tentatively Aug. 20).
What the forecast includes and omits: staff said the forecast reflects current service levels, the adopted capital improvement program and a stable mill levy of 28.701 mills (the county’s final 2025 rate). Cash‑funded CIP projects show about $31.8 million through 2029 and $19.9 million for Technology Review Board (TRB) projects. The forecast assumes a 5% increase in assessed value for 2026–2030 for planning; staff said that is conservative relative to recent growth.
Staff emphasized what is not yet factored in: new program funding requests, unbudgeted road projects, pending election equipment replacement beyond a $9.2 million placeholder in the equipment reserve, or the financial effects of any functional consolidations with the City of Wichita. The forecast currently treats significant TRB and CIP outlays as allowable uses of fund balance rather than recurring operating costs; removing those one‑time uses would show ongoing surpluses in the general fund in the near years, staff said.
Pay, benefits and personnel: the forecast includes a 5% pay pool for 2026 and lower increases in later years (staff detailed mix of step increases and small general adjustments by plan), plus a 5% annual assumption for health‑insurance cost growth. Budget staff reported stronger staffing levels than recent years and noted that rising filled positions have driven up people costs in 2024–2025.
Public engagement and tools: county staff and Wichita State University will open a public budget simulator in May so residents can test tradeoffs and provide priorities. Commissioners will hold department hearings in May and five workshop Tuesdays between May 17 and June 13 for follow‑ups.
Major risk: a prospective state property‑tax lid. Staff warned that if the state adopts a 3% cap on assessed‑value growth (or an equivalent “property tax lid”) and the county holds a flat mill levy, the county’s tax‑funded property tax supported funds could move into sustained deficits well beyond the forecasted one‑time draws for CIP and TRB projects. Staff said even a modest cap compounds over multiple years and would greatly constrain the county’s ability to grow service levels — particularly public‑safety staffing and EMS expansion — without new fees or reductions in services.
Next steps: managers will collect department decision packages; the county manager will issue a recommended budget July 9; commissioners will hear public comment at two hearings (July 30 and August 20). Staff asked the commission for guidance on priorities and noted that the forecast will be updated during budget development.
Ending note: commissioners and staff repeatedly framed the forecast as a planning tool — not a recommendation — and urged public engagement as the county translates the forecast into the manager’s recommended 2026 budget.
