[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6220257,"mediaKeyId","3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c","parentId",3617912,"title","Kent County budget work session outlines $5.7M FY2026 gap, commissioners weigh reserves, capital projects and school/jail choices","audioSeconds",6133,"startMs",2457000,"endMs",8590000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c&start=2457&end=8590","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c/thumbnail_2457000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6220257/Kent-County/Maryland/Kent-County-budget-work-session-outlines-57M-FY2026-gap-commissioners-weigh-reserves-capital-projects-and-schooljail-choices","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220257-5e45bdd8d432543053753115ad584c60/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109655&Signature=UY~O4hNAVv7rOySSGF3vPgsKP2--EHcxYTHezLDV7v19K6MjwxZouK3AGDSEMRSwNsnyrELNicp4g96N1rL5IPfvr1qBnRBgmqyXWOkgibpJAbBoq7RiuBwpQxq31PJN6XXQWaeWftgEzGjHpzPGTLBBv~eWLLS2vdxoR5Hgr5qsjpOMB~8pCwnAIwmqtStN~3B2uxYVwJI4jaQ8jiUtaVqWxt-3vCyBrjFuuFpBuNtVJ~U9687m36eEus2X3YORFzNx41QTz5CcKowxXMJTiAeTw-P~Tb-aA~A2EkObgaki-HVZjQ4WmUmttlKV9D76Cfnkuw0Z--TUgI81e17NkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Kent County, MD","date","2025-05-29T17:45:14Z","article","Kent County commissioners on March 26 reviewed a preliminary FY2026 budget outline that showed approximately $2.3 million in new revenue and $72.7 million in expenditures, leaving a projected deficit of roughly $5.7 million if no changes are made.

Pat (county finance lead) and Shelly (finance staff) walked commissioners through the revenue and expenditure summaries and flagged several drivers: an estimated $438,000 in new state mandates, a built‑in placeholder for employee salary increases (staff used a historical 4% benchmark pending final negotiation), higher benefits costs, and several large one‑time capital requests. The presentation showed the county is projected to end FY2025 with about $23 million in fund balance — approximately $18.2 million above the board’s stated target — giving commissioners flexibility to set aside one‑time funds for capital priorities.

Capital priorities drew extended discussion. Commissioners agreed they must decide whether to commit fund balance to major projects or preserve reserves. The board discussed a proposed new or substantially renovated middle school, which participants said could remain a heavy lift for the county even if state support is included — one working scenario reduced the county’s share but still left local debt service on the order of more than $1 million annually. The regional jail proposal remains uncertain; county staff said Queen Anne’s and Caroline County decisions are outstanding and a lack of commitments from those partners keeps the project on hold.

The board also considered repurposing Wharton Elementary School for county office space. Staff presented a rough estimate that remediation (roof, mold, office configuration) to make Wharton usable would be on the order of $2.0 million; commissioners discussed whether investing in Wharton could reduce recurring lease costs for offices currently leased around town (state’s attorney, health department, board of elections) and whether the county should reserve fund balance for that purpose.

Agency allocations were reviewed line by line. Highlights and preliminary board directions: the library’s request for new positions and a 5% salary increase drew pushback — commissioners proposed holding positions flat and applying the county’s salary increase benchmark to partner staff; the library’s $15,000 security camera purchase was suggested to be paid from the library’s fund balance rather than county operating support. Upper Shore Aging’s budget was discussed in light of recent state cuts; commissioners noted the county provided a one‑time $50,000 Meals on Wheels supplement during FY2025 and asked staff to calculate the impact if state funding is reduced further.

Emergency services and EMS staffing were a separate substantive item. EMS leadership described recruitment challenges for part‑time EMT positions, rising overtime use, and an anticipated increase in calls in the Betterton area. EMS asked for additional positions to improve 24/7 coverage and noted Betterton had requested a roughly $45,000 renovation to make space habitable for staffed personnel; commissioners asked staff for more specific cost and call‑volume data before deciding whether to add recurring positions in the budget.

Next steps: commissioners instructed staff to return with refined figures, alternative scenarios (for salaries, allocation flat‑funding or cuts, and targeted capital set‑asides) and comparative data for regional partners where appropriate. The county has a multi‑week budget schedule; the board reserved time in the final week of the month for intensive budget deliberations and a closed session on a personnel matter.

Ending: The budget work session closed with no formal votes; staff were to circulate updated schedules and fiscal runs ahead of the next budget meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","04.08.25 Budget Work Session","oneSentenceSummary","County staff presented a FY2026 baseline showing about $2.3 million in new revenue against $72.7 million in proposed expenditures, leaving a projected $5.7 million shortfall. Commissioners discussed holding many agency allocations flat, reserving fund balance for large capital projects, and awaiting school and regional jail decisions.","taxTitle","Kent County, Maryland","taxId",69327,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6220262,"Delmarva Community Services asks Kent County for about $157,000 to sustain rural transit, urges shift toward on‑demand service",666,1440000,2106000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c&start=1440&end=2106","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c/thumbnail_1440000.jpg","/articles/6220262/Kent-County/Maryland/Delmarva-Community-Services-asks-Kent-County-for-about-157000-to-sustain-rural-transit-urges-shift-toward-ondemand-service","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220262-c4db6120071bf1ceeed88e0fbb4dcce3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109655&Signature=OxUm0nEx~jCOJWejjkMRwDF7lnZW4XMvfvhyx0LoI9Ky0AoLwXYgzMStpZVB0H6g3UvU5PyvKo5cm1Amtx8qSSkkp6tBclljcl5hzcY6j2XTzA8RdfMMC7wReXtjtZnzZROFIRCH7wI0sGN33efQvO45H87NJo2GgSFaEOIGBCfRKjvlM7q6oSoJhaZJgmM0i93zAN98VZTpleWWBvWdIf23kul7QMp625Mbu05eVMdoeg-FempgUXLgekIgh9sFq2j9acrhpXa8P9~C1MFCkIrR4Nqg-BExoBoxDwxZbQrzbsfeY0rYsSIbhgIBbif25TBJYFf~~oH27piBOenBrg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Delmarva Community Services (DCS) on March 26 presented an operating request to Kent County commissioners for roughly $157,000 to maintain rural transit service and expand a mobility‑on‑demand (MOD) pilot that DCS said has already logged substantial use.

Andy (representing Delmarva Community Services) told commissioners the transit operator provided 6,728 trips in the most recent year, with the busiest route recording 3,062 trips and the second busiest 1,896 trips. He said the unadvertised Kent on Demand pilot completed 1,405 trips; DCS urged active advertising and expansion of the program to serve more riders in concentrated areas.

“Rural transit simply does not make money,” Andy said, describing the system as a subsidy that provides essential mobility for residents with few alternatives. He asked the board to consider the requested operating funds — which he characterized as necessary to avoid route reductions and to support efforts to grow the MOD program — while acknowledging commissioners face competing priorities.

Henry T., identified as DCS’s transit director in the meeting, and Andy described operations: the county is served by six routes, and DCS is trialing smaller, wheelchair‑accessible vehicles for on‑demand trips inside denser service areas to reduce costs and improve customer experience. DCS described benefits including shorter waits, door‑to‑door service and the ability to serve riders with mobility needs more efficiently than large buses.

Commissioners and DCS discussed regional cost sharing. Andy said the current agreement splits costs evenly among participating counties (Kent, Talbot, Caroline), while ridership and service levels differ; he recommended the counties revisit the allocation formula so Kent and Caroline pay less when Talbot receives a larger share of service. Andy said a reallocation could lower Kent’s annual request in future years.

DCS also reported an operational ask tied to Betterton Volunteer Fire Company: Betterton has sought county help to renovate a bunk room so DCS personnel can be stationed there; a cost estimate of about $45,000 for the renovation was mentioned. Andy said DCS would prefer locally based paid EMTs in places such as Betterton to reduce response times and improve coverage; commissioners asked staff to review those requests as part of the budget process.

There was no vote. Commissioners said they will review the request during the FY2026 budget process and consider inter‑county cost‑sharing and next steps for mobility‑on‑demand. DCS said it would follow up with county staff and explore adjustments if commissioners request additional data or alternative funding scenarios.

Ending: The board scheduled the request for further review in the FY2026 budget process and asked staff to gather comparative data from neighboring counties as part of that review.","Delmarva Community Services asked commissioners for roughly $157,000 in operating funds and urged expansion of a pilot mobility‑on‑demand service after reporting 6,728 trips countywide and 1,405 trips on the Kent on Demand pilot.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6220267,"Kent County hears preliminary utility rate study recommending phased 4% annual increases, higher allocation fees",774,312000,1086000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c&start=312&end=1086","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617912-d6ab5b9d5d09526a1914e8a099d42f1c/thumbnail_312000.jpg","/articles/6220267/Kent-County/Maryland/Kent-County-hears-preliminary-utility-rate-study-recommending-phased-4-annual-increases-higher-allocation-fees","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220267-f7b1ad35e381dec5017d6461b3208146/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109655&Signature=NAbYZ020t2Dbq~qh7LFE9qFAswhLXY3dmZ69eiOHNz5hbOxdCUHHRppbjdetpjlChXSWDc0TCyBU88Acnn24MPNPx3JXMjmmev1gOGddHnekrR8BMAP74AHyuwfxux7Z7Psl7uTDmL-32x88-hezK~KjowRmxZ~1TuRjQ5X7YscaT58WQgxWnKGxRmyGC4NHnrWyzHmeJd~q9aFgwd-GVbLYSlW39182mQf8~kw-9LMjtUmBX18v-3MihvuLj0DFFI3ja4Szj4Y0J~8K2LxR0PwB5qcMZTlmcF2c9xVp0M19uW1tKWEMJ-zu0gCA-JhBjLxXNRrO2ikwi4QDP5o38g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Kent County commissioners on March 26 received preliminary findings from NewGen Strategies showing the county’s water and wastewater systems will likely need phased annual rate increases and higher allocation fees to meet capital plans, debt service and reserve targets.

The study recommended a phased 4% annual increase to user rates and a 4% annual increase to allocation (connection) fees as a baseline, with an alternative 8% annual path that would reduce longer‑term subsidies. Mike Maker of NewGen Strategies told the board staff used conservative assumptions — “we're just being conservative here using about a 3% escalation rate” — for salaries, benefits and materials when projecting operating costs.

The study separates recurring operating costs, which the firm said should be covered by user rates, from growth‑related capital costs that allocation fees can fund. NewGen recommended two reserve targets: an operating reserve equal to 90 days (about 25% of operating expenses) and a capital reserve set at roughly 2% of fixed asset value. Maker estimated those capital reserve contributions at about $3,035,000 per year for water and about $130,000 per year for sewer based on the county’s asset inventory.

Maker said customer counts are modeled to grow about 2% annually for water and about 1% for sewer, with a one‑time larger customer addition when Millington brings on a new wastewater treatment plant (anticipated in 2028). NewGen modeled that Millington as a large capital driver and showed wastewater capital needs on a larger dollar scale (charts in the presentation used a top y‑axis near $12 million for sewer projects versus roughly $1.6 million for water projects in the immediate years).

On funding, NewGen outlined a combination of cash (PAYGO), debt and grants. Water projects shown in the plan were largely non‑growth replacements and financed with cash, while the Millington wastewater program was modeled largely as debt growth with some grant assumptions (the presentation cited ARPA and other grants already applied to Millington). Maker cautioned that grants are not guaranteed and that if allocation fees fall short of covering growth‑related capacity, existing ratepayers could face higher charges to cover those costs.

NewGen gave an example bill: a typical quarterly residential customer using 12,000 gallons would see about a $13.50 increase under a 4% across‑the‑board adjustment (from roughly $340 to about $353 per quarter in the study’s example). The firm also showed that phasing increases at 8% annually would lower required general‑fund subsidies later in the forecast — NewGen estimated that, with compounding, the larger step would reduce future subsidies by roughly a quarter compared with the 4% path.

There was no immediate decision. Commissioners and staff discussed the study’s assumptions, how to split any general‑fund subsidies between water and sewer, and whether to ask NewGen to run alternate scenarios or specific rate numbers as the county finalizes its FY2026 budget.

Ending: Commissioners directed staff to keep the study in the FY2026 budget discussion and to return with follow‑up runs if the board wants different rate or subsidy scenarios. No formal action or vote occurred during the work session.","NewGen Strategies told Kent County commissioners that water and sewer systems will likely need phased annual increases and stronger reserve contributions to fund a five‑year capital plan — including a large Millington wastewater project — and reduce future general‑fund subsidies.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Kent County budget work session outlines $5.7M FY2026 gap, commissioners weigh reserves, capital projects and school/jail choices

Delmarva Community Services asks Kent County for about $157,000 to sustain rural transit, urges shift toward on‑demand service

Kent County hears preliminary utility rate study recommending phased 4% annual increases, higher allocation fees