Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Miller County quorum court begins review of draft 2026 budget, highlights reserves and courthouse restoration fund

Miller County Quorum Court · November 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Miller County Quorum Court meeting, officials reviewed an $8.5 million draft budget, discussed a $3.43 million investment fund and a one-time Courthouse Restoration Fund, and agreed on a process to trim line items and delay payroll decisions until the end of the review.

Unidentified Speaker 1 opened the meeting and presented the treasurer’s report showing current fund balances, including a general fund balance of $955,000 and a County General Investment Fund balance of $3,430,000. He explained that a one-time Courthouse Restoration Fund has been earmarked for repairs and will skew year-over-year budget comparisons if treated as recurring revenue.

The court was told the printed budget detail report can change weekly; Speaker 1 encouraged members to request fresh printouts from the clerk’s office and to review department lines individually between meetings. He described a new review approach: staff will leave payroll until the final stage so raises, if any, are evaluated across the whole budget rather than line-by-line on a case-by-case basis.

Speaker 1 reported the current draft overall budget at $8,513,790 with roughly $7.5 million spent year to date and about $2,341,000 remaining. He explained appropriation guidance used in the book: some funds are treated as 90% available for appropriation while grants, designated sales-tax receipts and transfers may be counted at 100%, and earmarked or grant funds revert to their dedicated accounts if unspent.

Members asked for clarification about anticipated election reimbursements and courthouse grant timing. County staff said anticipated state election reimbursements should be reviewed (a $75,000 line appears conservative and may be adjusted), and they described two courthouse-related grants: a sidewalk/TAP grant and a historical courthouse basement grant that received a roughly $98,000 award toward remediation.

The judge urged members to inspect specific budgets where spending appears low or high and to coordinate with department heads to identify lines that can be trimmed. He said he will perform much of the line review outside public meetings and asked elected officials to take budgets home for focused review before reconvening.

The court scheduled a follow-up meeting for Monday at 5:30 p.m. and set smaller committee meetings (insurance/ordinance) to finish related business before the next full session. The meeting closed with direction for departments to return revised requests ready for the next review session.