Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Auditor reports $62M net position; resident urges clearer property‑tax messaging
Summary
Deputy auditor presented the unaudited annual report showing a $62 million net position (about $35.47M restricted for the Justice Center). During public comment a resident criticized a county Facebook post claiming a 55.85% tax increase and urged clearer separation of valuation-driven increases from county-controlled levy decisions.
Lincoln County’s deputy auditor presented the county’s unaudited annual report and a management discussion and analysis during the May 26 commission meeting, and residents used the public‑comment period to press the board for clearer communication about property‑tax changes.
Deputy auditor Michelle (last name not specified) told commissioners the county’s net position at the end of fiscal 2025 was $62,000,000, of which about $35,468,000 is restricted—largely for the Justice Center bond—and about $27,000,000 is unrestricted. She described the capital project fund for the Justice Center, the general fund and the debt service fund, and explained that the county draws down bond proceeds to pay construction costs and will move those obligations into debt service as the project completes.
Michelle said the county’s total receipts were about $195,000,000 across all taxing districts and that the county retains roughly 12¢ of every dollar collected locally; she contrasted that with a statewide county average of about 27% retention. Michelle also described investment interest and assigned dollars in the general fund and said assigned funds are generally designated by the governing body for capital improvements or other projects.
During the public‑comment period Tom Johnson of Lincoln County criticized a county Facebook post he said displayed a 55.85% property‑tax increase (versus a cited 16.7% income increase), calling the post misleading and urging the commission to separate valuation‑driven tax changes from the county’s levy decisions. Johnson said valuations, school district levies and municipal decisions largely drive tax bills and recommended clearer breakdowns so residents understand what the county controls and what it does not.
Chair and commissioners responded with brief follow‑up questions to staff about assigned dollars, investment accounts and debt schedules. Linda Montgomery asked that the auditor’s charts be attached to the agenda packet or linked on the county website so the public can view them after the meeting.
What happens next: the county will proceed with statutory audit steps and publish the annual report; commissioners did not adopt new tax policy at the meeting but heard requests for improved public communications about tax drivers.
