Members of the McLean County Funding Advisory Committee met in a special session to reconsider a FY2026 budget amendment seeking support for two Brightpoint programs: a supervised family visitation center and a children’s waiting room located at the McLean County Law & Justice Center.

The committee heard presentations from court administrators and Brightpoint staff about program scope, staffing and costs. William Scanlon, court administrator for the judicial circuit, said the CJCC proposal is focused on county use: “the criminal justice coordinating councils is only related to McLean County,” and the visitation program as proposed is for persons ordered into the McLean County Circuit Court process. Brightpoint representatives told the committee they lost a prior grant that had supported expansion and that, without new funding, “If we don't receive additional funding we'll have to close the programs.”

Why it matters: committee members flagged potential funding already collected for program use and urged caution about short-term fixes. Audit documents cited during the meeting suggested an accumulated balance in the neutral-site custody-exchange fund that could be in the range of roughly $95,000–$98,000 at the end of 2024. County staff said they would confirm those figures with the auditor before any funds were committed.

Committee discussion centered on three practical points: the two services have different statutory and operational characteristics and were historically budgeted separately; custody-exchange/court filing fees fund a dedicated neutral-site account that can be requested via a county budget amendment; and fees and revenues vary widely because they depend on filings and fee waivers. Brightpoint and court staff supplied program-level estimates: the proposal's total request was presented as about $150,000, with roughly 2.19 FTE shared across both programs and about 31.5% of staffing estimated to support the children's waiting room (approximately $46,000–$49,000 of direct costs including salary and fringe).

The committee considered an amendment to prioritize use of the county neutral-site custody-exchange fund for the supervised visitation center while separating consideration of the children's waiting room into a distinct request. Procedural uncertainty and a lack of vetted line-item budgets led members to withdraw or let earlier motions die in favor of a short, focused follow-up: Brightpoint and court staff will supply a line-by-line budget for each program and county auditors will confirm the precise fund balance. The FAC agreed to target a Friday meeting — the earliest feasible date given Open Meetings Act posting requirements — to review the verified numbers and forward any recommended budget amendment through the county executive and board processes if appropriate.

What the committee decided: no budget amendment was adopted at the special meeting. Instead, the FAC directed staff to (1) provide separate, detailed program budgets for the supervised visitation center and the children's waiting room within 24–48 hours, (2) confirm the neutral-site custody-exchange fund balance with the auditor, and (3) reconvene on a near-term date to consider a targeted amendment for the visitation center and a separate pathway (emerging-needs or BHCC review) for the children's waiting room.

Next steps: county staff said they can submit verified financial documents to the FAC and place a procedural item on the executive committee agenda. If FAC recommends use of reserves, the court/administration would follow with a county-board budget amendment to release those funds for calendar-year 2026. The FAC adjourned after the scheduling discussion.