Auditors flag vacancies, budget variances in Anne Arundel County’s FY27 review; administration largely agrees but resists two cuts

The Anne Arundel County Council on May 27 heard a presentation from the county auditor’s office that identified repeated vacancies, newly budgeted positions and several capital-project variances in the proposed FY27 budget.

Louis Duncan Jr., executive manager for the Office of the County Auditor, said the audit used a fluctuation analysis comparing FY26 to FY27 and a 1% departmental threshold plus a 5% fluctuation rule to flag variances that warranted follow-up. “We performed a fluctuation analysis to identify budget variances from fiscal year ’26 to ’27 which exceeded our established threshold,” Duncan said.

Melanie Bishop, the county auditor, summarized drivers behind the flagged operating variances, including rising contractual-services costs (electricity, curbside waste and recycling contracts), higher lease and vehicle operating costs, increases in grants and paygo spending, and component-unit pressures tied in part to the Board of Education’s insurance and special-education staffing needs. “For contractual services, we noticed there was rising costs for electricity across county facilities,” Bishop said.

The auditors reported personnel findings after independently recalculating salary and benefit projections and reviewing staffing snapshots over multiple years. Their analysis identified 26 positions vacant for two or more years (13 vacant two+ years and 13 vacant three+ years), with appropriated funds totaling about $2.3 million ($1.3 million for 3+ years; $1.1 million for 2+ years). The audit also noted 63 new positions in the general fund totaling roughly $6.5 million and five new positions in other funds aggregating to just over $500,000.

Duncan emphasized a limitation of the work: auditors did not follow up with the county personnel office to confirm whether positions were continuously vacant, re-encumbered, or re-advertised during the period. “We did not have the opportunity to follow up with the county personnel to determine whether those positions were initially filled and then remained vacant again or the lapse in time,” he said.

On capital projects, an auditor staff member reported judgmental sampling that yielded about $5.2 million in amounts flagged for consideration across several classes: general-county projects ($2.87 million), roads and bridges ($1.7 million), traffic control ($300,000) and water-quality improvements ($325,000). The auditors also flagged an apparent unbudgeted revenue entry in Bill 4126 totaling about $71,820.

Chris Trumbauer, the county’s budget officer, told the council the administration reached out to departments after receiving the auditors’ vacancy list and provided a table with updated status (positions filled, in process, or with extenuating circumstances). He said the administration’s turnover model already builds vacancy trends into budget projections, so eliminating the identified positions would not necessarily free funds for reallocation. “Those positions and the fact that they’ve been vacant, that’s all built into our turnover model,” Trumbauer said.

Trumbauer said the administration agreed with the bulk of the audit recommendations but objected to two proposed cuts: reductions tied to the fire equipment maintenance facility and the Ralph Bunch Community Center. He explained that construction bids are not yet in and that cutting the approximately $70,000 the audit suggested for each project could create funding shortfalls if bids come in high. He also noted a corrected recommended cut amount for a Forest Drive improvement item that the administration reflected in its spreadsheet.

Council member Ms. Robbie asked where the agreed-upon operating cuts were documented; staff clarified that the administration had provided vacancy-status materials and that there were not universally agreed operating cuts to adopt. Council member Mr. Smith pressed the auditors and budget staff on revenue trends, noting that in recent years the county’s actual receipts often exceeded projections. Auditors and Trumbauer attributed past overperformance largely to one-time items — notably investment income and stronger-than-expected income-tax returns — and warned that projecting recurring income-tax growth upward increases budget risk. “Income tax wage growth is slowing,” Trumbauer said, adding that the administration’s forecast is somewhat more bullish than peer jurisdictions but that raising recurring revenue assumptions would raise the chance of future shortfalls.

No formal budget votes were taken at the May 27 meeting. Council member Mr. Volpe moved to adjourn; the motion was seconded and carried. The council adjourned until its next regular legislative session on Monday, June 1, 2026, at 7:00 p.m.

What’s next: audit staff and the administration will continue to work with council members through amendment day to refine vacancy details, project numbers and any targeted operating or capital adjustments ahead of final FY27 decisions.