Clermont County releases draft 2026 budget showing narrow operating cushion and large capital requests
November 19, 2025 | Clermont County, Ohio
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Clermont County budget staff on Nov. 19 gave commissioners an initial look at the 2026 budget draft, briefing the board on revenue assumptions, departmental requests, and capital obligations that will require the board’s decisions before final adoption.
Emily Akers, controller in the county Office of Budget Management, told commissioners the draft covers 99 funds and focuses on the general fund, where operating revenue is estimated at about $88.6 million and operating expenses in the draft total roughly $87.2 million. That leaves an available amount of about $1.4 million before any salary actions; Akers noted a 1% salary increase would equate to roughly $350,000. She cautioned that roughly 75% of county operating expenses are salary-related and that $2.6 million in departmental requests were excluded from the draft.
Akers highlighted revenue assumptions: property taxes (reported at about $13.16 million in 2025 with modest growth expected), sales tax as the largest single revenue source and a key driver of operating revenues, investment income conservatively budgeted at $6 million, and intergovernmental lines that include casino revenue and indigent-defense reimbursements. She also warned that a potential local decision to double the homestead rollback would reduce county revenue by about $1.6 million if the state does not reimburse the increase.
On capital, Akers said the county carries more than $29 million in rolled-forward capital projects, has roughly $2 million in additional planned projects and an outstanding $6 million microwave backhaul project for 911 towers scheduled to move to contract next year; she said escalating construction and HVAC costs are pressuring capital appropriations. With current draft appropriations across funds at roughly $364 million versus projected revenues of about $319 million, the draft shows a $44 million draw on funds that must be resolved before adoption.
Akers listed $1.46 million in discretionary items the board must consider and reviewed departmental increases (sheriff bargaining increases and contract funds; board of elections overtime; prosecutor annualized costs; juvenile detention contractual obligations) and other non-general-fund items including water resources construction and enterprise fund draws. She also identified options for addressing the capital cash shortfall: reduce appropriations, use general-fund surplus, or delay projects.
What happens next: administration will return with updated details Dec. 1 and the board plans to adopt the appropriation resolution tentatively on Dec. 10. Akers emphasized the county will operate on a balanced-cash basis and that formal adoption requires adjustments to eliminate the draft draw.
Quoted on the record: "We are going to hold the operating budget flat at $6,000,000 in investment income and set anything above aside for non‑operating or one‑time costs," Akers told the board. The board and administration agreed to return with more detailed figures ahead of the adoption vote.
The presentation packet and final appropriation documents will provide exact numeric allocations and signed entries when the board acts later in the process.
Emily Akers, controller in the county Office of Budget Management, told commissioners the draft covers 99 funds and focuses on the general fund, where operating revenue is estimated at about $88.6 million and operating expenses in the draft total roughly $87.2 million. That leaves an available amount of about $1.4 million before any salary actions; Akers noted a 1% salary increase would equate to roughly $350,000. She cautioned that roughly 75% of county operating expenses are salary-related and that $2.6 million in departmental requests were excluded from the draft.
Akers highlighted revenue assumptions: property taxes (reported at about $13.16 million in 2025 with modest growth expected), sales tax as the largest single revenue source and a key driver of operating revenues, investment income conservatively budgeted at $6 million, and intergovernmental lines that include casino revenue and indigent-defense reimbursements. She also warned that a potential local decision to double the homestead rollback would reduce county revenue by about $1.6 million if the state does not reimburse the increase.
On capital, Akers said the county carries more than $29 million in rolled-forward capital projects, has roughly $2 million in additional planned projects and an outstanding $6 million microwave backhaul project for 911 towers scheduled to move to contract next year; she said escalating construction and HVAC costs are pressuring capital appropriations. With current draft appropriations across funds at roughly $364 million versus projected revenues of about $319 million, the draft shows a $44 million draw on funds that must be resolved before adoption.
Akers listed $1.46 million in discretionary items the board must consider and reviewed departmental increases (sheriff bargaining increases and contract funds; board of elections overtime; prosecutor annualized costs; juvenile detention contractual obligations) and other non-general-fund items including water resources construction and enterprise fund draws. She also identified options for addressing the capital cash shortfall: reduce appropriations, use general-fund surplus, or delay projects.
What happens next: administration will return with updated details Dec. 1 and the board plans to adopt the appropriation resolution tentatively on Dec. 10. Akers emphasized the county will operate on a balanced-cash basis and that formal adoption requires adjustments to eliminate the draft draw.
Quoted on the record: "We are going to hold the operating budget flat at $6,000,000 in investment income and set anything above aside for non‑operating or one‑time costs," Akers told the board. The board and administration agreed to return with more detailed figures ahead of the adoption vote.
The presentation packet and final appropriation documents will provide exact numeric allocations and signed entries when the board acts later in the process.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
