King William County outlines $53.7 million FY2026 budget, proposes 3.5¢ real-estate tax increase

County staff presented a draft $53,663,150 budget for fiscal year 2026 at the King William County Board of Supervisors meeting, proposing a 3.5¢ increase in the real‑estate tax rate to help balance projected expenditures.

The presenter said the total proposed expenditures are $53,663,150, with the general fund budget at $38,585,304 — an increase from FY2025. The budget includes a $15,123,452 general‑fund transfer to the King William County Public School System, noting that the transfer includes school debt service and additional funding to hire teachers, expand arts and STEM programs and increase middle‑school extracurricular offerings.

The plan would add 20 full‑time and one part‑time positions across county departments. The presenter listed public‑safety additions among the 20 new positions: five sheriff’s deputies, one animal control deputy, a records administrator, two 9‑1‑1 dispatchers, and seven firefighter positions (including continuation of a previously approved reclassification). The budget also proposes an emergency‑services IT technician to manage equipment used by emergency personnel, a human‑resources specialist, and a grant writer for the finance department to centralize grant applications and reporting.

Capital priorities listed include new vehicles for the sheriff’s office and other departments, HVAC and roofing repairs, cybersecurity improvements and a modification to the treasurer’s office to add a secondary exit for safety. The county’s proposed debt service for the year was presented as $3,368,061 with roughly 44% county debt, 42% school debt and the remainder utility debt.

To cover spending, staff proposed a 3.5¢ increase in the real‑estate tax rate (expressed as cents on the tax rate). Using the presenter’s example of an average home valued at $300,000, staff said the increase would cost an average household about $8.75 per month ($105 per year) and presented a revenue estimate of $953,606 from the rate change. Board members later noted a separate figure mentioned in discussion ($983,606), and staff acknowledged they would reconcile the calculation before final action.

The presenter also noted a pending grant application that, if awarded, could reduce the local cost of some public‑safety positions; the grant amount referenced in the presentation was approximately $1,100,000 but staff emphasized the award was not yet confirmed.

Board members asked detailed questions about rate calculations, town vs. county rates, and alternative ways to deploy new revenue (for example, by phasing funding for multi‑year positions). Staff said departments had made some adjustments to requests and that certain inflationary items were included while some requested positions were not funded in the current draft. The board did not vote on the budget at the meeting and was encouraged to review materials and bring questions to upcoming public hearings on the tax rate and budget.

“The budget moves King William County forward,” the presenter said, emphasizing investments in public safety, education and administration. The board was reminded of upcoming public hearings and was asked to provide input before the board takes formal action.