Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lincoln County adopts budget amendment as residents warn of fiscal strain and raise Port Authority questions
Summary
The Board adopted Resolution 2025-29, a multi-fund budget amendment, after a public hearing in which residents warned of an emerging budget deficit and accused the Lincoln County Port Authority of violating open‑meeting laws and funneling public assets. County staff said reimbursements and late grants affect totals; the board approved the resolution with one recorded dissent.
The Lincoln County Board of Commissioners on Wednesday adopted Resolution 2025‑29, a broad budget amendment adding and adjusting multiple fund lines, after a public hearing where residents urged the board to address what they called an unsustainable budget path.
Clerk read the resolution into the record, listing a series of funds and line-item increases the board resolved to add or recognize as unanticipated revenue or expense. After the reading the board opened the floor for public comment.
Several residents urged fiscal caution. One commenter, who identified themself as DCOR of 1117 Nevada Avenue, told commissioners the county was “on a road toward bankruptcy” and that using one‑time or restricted funds to balance operations will not be sustainable. “You can’t just keep taking money from different pots and putting it into the general fund as you feel like it’s necessary,” the commenter said.
Mr. Drake, who presented levy and non‑levy budget sheets during the hearing, told commissioners the meeting materials showed a total budget requirement of roughly $15.87 million and, based on current levied and non‑levied projections, a deficit in the neighborhood of $1.3 million. He noted some line items are reimbursable grants and that newly approved contracts (for example, the animal‑control agreement with the City of Libby) will alter revenues and expenses once they are entered into the financial system.
DCOR also alleged that the Lincoln County Port Authority had operated in violation of Montana’s open‑meeting laws (citing MCA 2‑3‑203 in the hearing) and urged the commissioners to notify the county attorney and sheriff to investigate potential official misconduct. The claimant said transfers and sales of Port Authority property had deprived the county of funds and suggested that reclaiming oversight could mitigate budget pressures. Commissioners did not announce a formal investigation during the meeting; one commissioner said the county would consider changing policy so proceeds from property sales by smaller boards were returned to county coffers rather than retained by those boards.
After public comment the board voted to adopt Resolution 2025‑29. The roll call included at least one recorded dissent; the resolution carried. Commissioners scheduled presentation of the final budget for September 3 and told attendees that finalized budget documents would be available at the Clerk and Recorder’s office.
Why it matters: Adopting the amendment recognizes later-arriving grants, reimbursements and expenses the county must account for; public commenters warned that the county’s structural reliance on one‑time monies or board-held property sales to balance operations could create longer-term fiscal risk. The Port Authority allegations, raised publicly in two separate comment periods at the meeting, remain unresolved in the record and were referred to by commissioners in subsequent discussion of property-sale policy.
Next steps: The board scheduled the final budget presentation for September 3. The accusations about the Port Authority were recorded in public comment; any formal action or referral would need to be initiated by the board or a county attorney’s office.
