Marquette County executive finance panel sets 1% COLA floor, targets $300k–$500k general-fund draw for 2027 budget

The Marquette County Executive Finance Committee voted this month to direct staff to include a minimum 1% cost-of-living adjustment and a step increase in the 2027 budget guidance and to plan for a general-fund draw of $300,000 to $500,000.

The guidance motion, presented as a friendly amendment by County Clerk Kylie, was framed as a minimum baseline for budget development. Kylie summarized the proposal as a way to give departments predictable direction: "I chose to frame it as a friendly amendment ... to include a minimum of a 1% COLA increase and a step increase built into the 2027 budget." Committee members then called the question and approved the amendment.

The committee also debated how to structure committee involvement in a revised budgeting process tied to the county's strategic plan. County Administrator Ron said the new process may require executive-finance members to meet with oversight committees, potentially increasing per diems and workload, but argued the change would reduce last-minute revisions in November. "We're trying to get all on the same page in terms of the department's hours ... so some changes in one department don't surprise another," Ron said.

After discussion about revenue assumptions and auditor timing, the committee adopted a planning target motion moved by Mike Raditz and seconded by Lance (as stated in the meeting) that instructs staff to assume a general-fund draw between $300,000 and $500,000 when preparing the 2027 budget. The motion passed by voice vote.

Members pressed for clearer fund-balance reporting tied to the committee's three-month reserve policy. Multiple members said the auditor's forthcoming report (due next month) should present the general-fund balance on the committee's preferred standard, to avoid confusion when setting budget targets. One member summarized the need for consistent numbers: "If they're being accounted for and earmarked, it's easier to understand. But when you sit here and say we have a general fund that we don't even have a percentage on ... it's hard to make a decision."

The committee also discussed trade-offs if the planned draw proves insufficient, including possible service cuts, borrowing and targeted fee increases. Ron emphasized the constraint: "We are running very, very thin. So our ability to operate the way we're reduced to operating, providing the services we're used to providing, I think in the future, we're not going to be able to provide that level of service without an increase."

Next steps: staff will incorporate the 1% minimum and step guidance into the formal budget guidance to department heads, and will prepare budget drafts using the $300,000to$500,000 draw assumption; auditors' year-end numbers expected in August should clarify the committee's options before final votes this fall.