The County Has a Budget Hearing Too!

Yes, the city of Moscow’s election season is starting, but before that, we have a public hearing to review. Here’s what went down when the commissioners met to discuss the approval of the FY2026 annual budget!

Read the full transcript of the video below:

How’s it going y’all? Aiden Anderson here with the Moscow Minutes. On Tuesday, after much discussion, the Latah County Commissioners passed the FY2026 annual budget, two to one. How did it all go down? Well, let’s take a look.

Before we get to that, I want to mention that the commissioners met with Amy Dundon, a representative with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), earlier in the day ahead of the budget hearing. Dundon spoke to the commissioners as a legal strategist who regularly interacts with state-level lawmakers, and who is interested in exploring the concerns that local officials have given the current trajectory of the nation and the state at large. 

Some main items of focus in Dundon’s discussion with the commissioners included public defense legislation and frustrations when it came to communication and education between the plans that state lawmakers have had, and their actual impacts on local governing bodies. There was also a brief conversation on the difficulty of passing bonds and gathering funds for a project such as a county jail. Commissioner Lamar in particular expressed his frustration with what seems to be an oppositional relationship that the county has with the state before the meeting concluded.

Now onto the budget! We covered the details of the county budget in our last video, so if you want to learn more about the numbers, go check that out. For the details of the budget hearing, keep on watching!

The commissioners’ room was packed out for the meeting itself, and as a person who regularly attends their meetings, let me tell you, that is quite the rarity. Once commission chair Tom Lamar introduced the meeting, county clerk Julie Fry walked the audience through the budget.

Julie began by presenting elements of the budget process, highlighting that like the city of Moscow, the county budgeting process actually begins far earlier in the year, culminating in a series of budget workshops in the summer months prior to the hearing. 

We then got to see a series of graphs recounting the past 10 years of Latah County finances divided into different categories, such as revenues, fund balances, and expenses. In short, an explanation of how the county got financially to where it is today. A couple things to note from that.

Firstly, the county received a bump in fund balances as a recipient of ARPA grant money back in early 2020s, but that money has all been previously spent or devoted to various projects. Second, the county has experienced a significant increase in operations costs, particularly in regards to personnel. Julie highlighted the role that nationwide inflation has had on expenses as a whole; with the county being relatively inflexible when it comes to how it raises and spends its money, there are ways in which it is particularly susceptible to inflationary pressure. Some operations costs have also increased due to the impending shutdown of the county jail, while others have decreased, due to the county having concluded their business with the Bryan Kohberger trial.

I’ll mention as well that Julie confirmed a theory we presented in our last video relative to the actual size of the budget. While the total budget looks like it has been significantly increased when compared to previous years, that is largely due to the presence of a $14.5 million grant for broadband infrastructure. If you take that grant out, the grand total is closer to $28 million, which is much more on par with previous budgets.

Next up, we got a look at the budget highlights when it comes to capital projects. A number of these projects have to do with facility construction, such as the county shop and various upgrades to county security and IT. There is also $1 million being set aside for a potential land purchase, related to the county’s long term plans for a new jail facility in the future.

As far as property taxes go, the county is looking at an average tax bill of $278.48 per $100,000 of taxable property value, which is $4.61 more than last year. The county also hoped to implement a 2.5% COLA for its employees, alongside a variable Compa-ratio. 

The head of planning and building also came up to present the county’s planned fee resolution accompanying the budget. These are fees that are paid for a wide variety of county services, including permitting, rentals, and construction projects. An example of a fee highlighted at the hearing was the fee for a non-standard address change, which is being increased from $50 to $100. Some of these fees are being changed due to standardization, and some are being changed due to inflation.

The commissioners then turned to the audience to receive public comment, of which there were several. Most folks came to speak in favor of the wage increases provided in the budget for county employees, while also expressing their concerns about putting aside money for a future jail project. Dan Schoenberg, Kenton Bird, Karen Hanson, Treasurer BJ Swanson, Museum Director Hayley Noble, and Kathy Dawes were among those who spoke.

With that, the commissioners moved on to deliberate amongst themselves. Tony Johnson spoke first, expressing his desire to be both fiscally responsible and conservative, what with future pressures the county might face. He spoke against supporting the budget as it was presented unless they could lower the COLA to a 1.5% increase.

Jason Stooks also expressed his reservations about the 2.5% COLA, admitting that he didn’t like the idea of voting for a raise for himself. He preferred a 1.75% COLA as a “meet in the middle” approach, and cautioned about limitations of being able to pay employees as well in the future. He also spoke in justification of the $1 million being set aside for the jail, arguing that setting money aside would help them better prepare for the future, whatever the county’s options end up being.

Tom Lamar spoke in favor of the budget as presented, arguing that since the county could afford to give the 2.5% COLA presently, adopting it would be the best thing to do in regards to long term employee retention. He also argued that setting $1 million aside for the jail would be better for future decision making on that project.

While this deliberation continued for some time, with particular focus on county salaries, the commissioners voted 2-1 to approve the budget as it was presented with Tony Johnson being the dissenting vote. In his voting, Commissioner Stooks reiterated his concerns about hitting limits in the future when it came to county salaries.

It was all pretty straightforward after that. The L-2 dollar certification for 2025 and the fee resolution for FY2026 all passed unanimously before the commissioners went off the record for the day. The county now has a budget plan for the year ahead.

That’s all I got for you this week. It was encouraging to see many more people at the public hearing providing input on a budget which has not gotten a lot of attention in the past, and I would commend any citizen of the county to do likewise with any number of the county meetings going forward. As always, we’ll have the relevant links posted with this video, and if you have any questions, please reach out. I’m Aiden Anderson with the Moscow Minutes. See you next time!