Madison County board debates holding taxes steady as budget work continues

Madison County supervisors spent a lengthy special budget work session weighing whether to publish the maximum allowable tax levy or hold the same dollar tax amount as last year while continuing a detailed, line-by-line review of the proposed 2025 budget.

The board set two procedural resolutions earlier in the meeting but devoted most of its time to personnel and capital questions: how to match union-required increases, whether elected offices should receive a 2.5% across-the-board adjustment, how to fund part-time wage bumps, and whether to keep a $200,000 ambulance line partly funded by ARPA. Staff said the county can only increase general-revenue collections by about $185,000 under the Department of Management’s maximum-revenue guidance, which limited how much new growth could be translated into higher taxes.

Speaker 1 framed the trade-off: publishing the maximum levy gives the county flexibility to avoid cutting services or staff later, while holding the same dollar amount as last year would deliver visible taxpayer relief. "We're holding at the same tax amount, not the levy amount," Speaker 1 said when describing the board’s preferred framing of the notice; other members said that publishing a higher maximum gives the board room to adjust downward once fund balances and final numbers are known.

Staff presented options to offset personnel costs, including removing a $40,000 truck-replacement line from a department’s request and instead keeping proposed raises, breaking out bundled postage and mail-service costs (about $13,000 annually) into separate lines for clarity, and treating some one-time funds as non-recurring. The ambulance budget included a proposed $2-per-hour bump for EMTs and EMAs that staff estimated would increase part-time wages by about $35,040 in total.

Members also debated paying for an external inspection of the recently completed courthouse project. Board members raised public complaints about project delays and cost overruns; the inspector’s quoted engagement rates ranged from a four-hour minimum to higher hourly fees for extended services. One supervisor urged caution, citing warranty timelines and the project’s recent completion.

No final levy decision was adopted during the session. The board asked staff to deliver fund-balance figures, invoice verifications for one-off receipts (such as an ICAP payment tied to generator repairs), and clearer breakouts for vendor and postage lines. Supervisors scheduled a follow-up work session for Monday at 2:00 p.m. to finalize the notice and refine the draft budget before filing required documents.

The board also agreed to move one resolution to the March 11 regular meeting and to set public hearings for the property tax notice (April 1, 2025) and for the full budget (April 21, 2025).

Next steps: staff will produce fund-balance numbers, confirm outstanding invoices tied to negative or surplus lines, and return with options on the board-clerk position and the courthouse inspection cost.