Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the County Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Newberry County previews $42.0M general-fund budget with no millage increase; proposes higher transfer-station fees and 3% pay proposal

Newberry County Council · March 24, 2026
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

County staff presented a $42,003,042 general-fund proposal for FY 2026–27 that would not raise the county's millage rate, budgets a 3% across-the-board pay proposal held in non-departmental, proposes raising transfer-station tipping fees to offset solid-waste costs, and includes lease-purchase and GO-bond financing for capital purchases. Council recessed and will resume review tomorrow.

Newberry County staff on Monday presented a proposed FY 2026–27 budget that holds the county's millage rate steady while recommending fee and capital changes to cover rising costs and prioritized equipment purchases.

Mister Luckadoo, the county's lead presenter, said the proposed general fund totals $42,003,042, an increase of roughly $2.16 million (about 5.4%) over the current year. "This proposed budget, staff does not propose a general fund millage increase or fee increases within this budget," Luckadoo said, adding that staff is instead recommending targeted adjustments to specific fees to offset operating-cost increases.

Among those adjustments, staff asked the council to increase transfer-station fees by $3 per ton and add a $1-per-ton fuel surcharge. Luckadoo detailed the new rate structure, saying it would "raise the rates to $73 per ton for the first thousand tons in the fiscal year, $75 per ton after the first thousand tons in the fiscal year, and $12 per ton in the fuel surcharges." He estimated the change would generate roughly 5% more revenue for the collections/transfer-station budget.

Staff also proposed a $744,193 planned use of fund balance (about 1.77% of the budget) as a balancing tool and left a $250,000 projected increase in manufacturer reimbursement and an $86,946 motor-carrier fee increase as revenue offsets tied to state distributions and local growth.

On employee pay, staff recommended a county-wide 3% increase budgeted in a single non-departmental line item to be distributed if council approves the proposal. "It's budgeted within the non-departmental budget as one line-item appropriation," Luckadoo said; council members asked for clarification about when and how those funds would be allocated to departmental budgets.

Public-safety and capital requests were prominent. Luckadoo told council the law enforcement and detention division proposal totals $10,880,325, with the sheriff's office budgeted at $6,011,775. He said the sheriff's office needs a replacement records/report management system because the current provider is no longer in business and that staff estimates a $300,000 capital cost to acquire a new RMS: "we believe ... the $300,000 would cover the cost to purchase a new RMS system," Luckadoo said. The budget also contains capital requests for ambulances, a fire engine and public-works equipment to be financed via a $2.4 million lease-purchase and other capital-account transfers.

On utilities and fees, Luckadoo warned of a significant drop in watercraft-tax revenue due to state legislation moving to the governor's desk and noted the county is budgeting conservatively around that change. He also highlighted growth in permits and development activity as drivers of higher license-and-permit revenue.

Council members asked staff to follow up on several details, including wage levels at the county's recycling/convenience centers and how grant-dependent purchases (for example, SRO vehicles tied to a proposed $232,000 state grant) would be handled if the revenue does not materialize. One council member objected to the phrasing ‘‘tipping fees’’ and asked whether a different term could be used; another pressed staff to confirm cloud-backup retention meets state record-retention rules.

No final budget votes were taken. Council moved for a short recess and planned to continue review of the public-safety, special-revenue, debt-service and capital-projects portions of the budget at a subsequent meeting.

The council is expected to resume the budget workshop tomorrow to work through remaining funds and debt-service implications before scheduling any final readings or adoption votes.