Hamilton County administrator recommends $402.4 million general fund budget, proposes $1 per $1,000 transfer fee to fund housing

Hamilton County Administrator Jeff Alito presented the administration's recommended 2026 budget to the Board of County Commissioners on Nov. 6, saying the recommendation is a proposal for the board to consider rather than a final budget. The all‑funds plan totals $1,375,000,000 and the recommended general fund budget is $402,400,000, an increase of about $12.7 million (roughly 3 percent) over 2025.

Alito said the recommended general fund budget is balanced. "The recommended general fund budget is balanced, for those watching at home," he told the board, adding that the presentation reflects the administration's view and that the board will hold public hearings and make the final decisions.

Why it matters: the general fund supports the county's basic services, including the sheriff's office and county jail, courts, elections, 911 operations and social services. Alito told commissioners those public safety and judicial functions account for the majority of county spending and stressed the difficulty of balancing growing service demands with relatively flat revenue growth.

Key numbers and policy choices - All funds (the county's total budget across more than 80 funds): $1,375,000,000. - Recommended general fund: $402,400,000 (up about $12.7M from 2025). - Reserve: projected to close the year around a roughly 15 percent reserve balance (within county policy; slightly below the GFOA two‑month guideline). - Interest earnings: projected at $19,800,000; the administration recommends treating interest earnings as largely one‑time revenue and not counting them as recurring operating revenue. - Personnel: a recommended 3 percent general wage adjustment for non‑bargaining employees and a roughly 2.65 percent increase for medical contributions are included.

Revenue challenge and new fee proposal Alito emphasized that the county is becoming more dependent on sales tax and that organic revenue growth is slowing. To help close the gap between ongoing expenditures and revenues he recommended initiating the final one‑mill transfer/conveyance fee on property sales. The fee would amount to about $1 per $1,000 of purchase price (for example, $250 on a $250,000 sale). The administration projects the measure would generate about $4.7 million a year, and Alito proposed directing $1.0 million annually from that sum to a sustained affordable housing fund and about $3.7 million to support mandated and core county functions.

Capital, programs and tradeoffs The recommended budget preserves funding for core public safety, judicial and human services and continues investments in capital: Alito cited allocations for deferred facilities maintenance, justice center renovations (approximately $11.2 million cited in the presentation), and other infrastructure. At the same time, the recommendation reduces some economic development and competitive grant lines (for example, the community revitalization grant and site readiness programs) to prioritize mandated services.

Alito said departmental requests totaled roughly $60 million more than available general fund resources; to manage that gap the administration used a combination of targeted reductions and department-level target budgets that give agencies flexibility to meet those targets.

Risks and next steps Alito identified several risks: dependence on sales tax performance, potential state actions that could shift costs or restrict levy revenues, pressure on various levy funds that support mandated services, and federal policy changes (including potential administrative shifts to SNAP or Medicaid) that could increase county costs. The budget is scheduled to proceed through public hearings on Dec. 2 and Dec. 9 and be finalized by the board in mid‑December.

Commissioners' response Commissioners raised requests for further detail: several asked for a line‑item breakdown of funds and a clearer accounting of restricted funds and one‑time versus recurring revenues. Some members expressed reservations about the proposed transfer fee and about cuts to economic development programs; others emphasized the need to maintain staff and public safety investments. The administrator said the plan is a starting point for public hearings and department presentations in December.

Speakers (as referenced in meeting): Jeff Alito, County Administrator; Commissioners Stephanie Summerall Dumas, Alicia Rees, Denise Dreehouse.

Clarifying details: the administration described the general fund as "structurally balanced" (ongoing revenues to cover ongoing expenditures) in the recommendation; interest earnings are forecast at $19.8M but are presented as a one‑time resource; recommended wage increase cost is roughly $4.2M. Public hearings on the recommended budget are scheduled for Dec. 2 and Dec. 9.

Provenance: presentation begins at 00:37:25 in the transcript with Alito introducing the recommended budget and finishes at 00:43:59 where Alito closes the presentation and notes the budget is linked on the county website.