The Shelby County Board voted Oct. 9 to post the proposed fiscal year 2026 budget for public inspection, moving the document to the required public-viewing period and scheduling a final vote next month.

Board members said the budget work this year showed stronger department engagement and savings, but several members challenged revenue estimates supplied to the board — particularly projections for interest and local-use tax receipts — and criticized the county treasurer for not appearing in person to answer questions.

The posting vote permits the public to review the proposed spending and revenue plan before the board returns in November to consider final adoption. Chairman Mayall and other board members emphasized that amendments can be made between the posting and the final vote.

Why it matters: the budget sets spending and levy decisions that affect county services and employee pay and determines how the county will use one-time federal relief funds and special accounts. Members said they need stable, auditable revenue numbers to make fiscally sound final decisions.

Board finance overview and underspend projections
Board members reviewing year-to-date figures said the county is 88% through fiscal 2025 but had spent about 69.61% of the general fund budget and about 76% of all funds. Using monthly-average spending, one presenter forecast the county could finish the fiscal year roughly $1.7 million under the general-fund spending forecast and about $5.6 million under total funds budgeted for the year; presenters cautioned those figures are estimates and depend on remaining month-by-month spending.

Members noted caveats tied to contract back pay and one-time American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) allocations: some negotiated back pay that was not paid last year was charged to this year’s budget, and ARPA obligations continue to affect the county’s out-year planning.

Questions about revenue figures and treasurer attendance
Multiple board members pressed for clarity on revenue-line items that changed shortly before the meeting. One example discussed during the meeting was a “local use” interest/revenue account (referred to in materials as account 42040). Board members noted prior reports showed interest in the hundreds of thousands of dollars in past years, but the treasurer’s estimate for FY2026 in the circulated package was $66,000; other documents circulated in the days before the meeting showed figures such as roughly $97,000 or $160,000. The board asked the treasurer’s office for an explanation of the large variance.

Several members said the treasurer had been invited to the budget meetings and had declined to attend in person, asking instead that questions be emailed to her. Some board members said that practice limited the board’s ability to resolve discrepancies in real time when hundreds of pages of budget materials arrive close to the meeting date.

Staff responses and data updates
County staff said the difference in numbers was at least partly explained by an update made in the budget software shortly before the meeting; a finance staffer named Jessica said she had updated the current-fund balances in the system and reissued reports. Board members said they will request a clear audit trail and documentation supporting the revenue estimates before final adoption, and asked staff to provide a detailed explanation of the methodology the treasurer uses to forecast revenue (staff said the treasurer uses a five-year average).

Program-level amendments discussed
Board members also discussed several program-specific additions before posting. The animal-control program requested and the board advanced an increase in a pet-population account from $15,000 to $20,000; staff said the account is governed by the Illinois Animal Control Act and can only be used for sterilization, rabies vaccinations of adoptable pets, community cats and low-income owners’ pets. Deputy Parlow requested adjustments to an account labeled “017 assist court” so courthouse security and ADA compliance projects can be funded; staff described a proposed reallocation totaling $65,000 broken down as $35,000 for courthouse security, $15,000 transferred to the general fund, $5,000 to the law library and $10,000 for court assistance.

Health insurance and anticipated savings
County staff and board members described a recently negotiated change to the county’s health plan that staff estimated would reduce the county’s fixed health-care costs and lower total projected expenditures roughly $260,000–$270,000 versus the renewal fallback. Presenters said the change would not reduce employee benefit levels and that the savings were discovered after asking detailed questions of the county’s insurance vendors and staff.

Process and next steps
Chairman Mayall and several committee members thanked department heads for their cooperation in producing tighter budgets and noted that posting the proposed budget starts the public-comment period. The board will revisit the proposed document next month for final adoption; members asked staff to provide reconciled revenue support and to respond to the treasurer’s forecasting methodology and the discrepancies noted at the meeting.

Ending: The board’s vote to post the proposed FY2026 budget was unanimous; board members said they will continue to request clarified revenue backing documents and will accept amendments before the final vote in November.