Budget Commission Approves Russell Township’s 2027 Budget
with $1.7 Million in Levy Suspensions and Tables Geauga County’s Budget Again
Budget Commission Meeting – September 14, 2026
Meeting Details: The Geauga County Budget Commission met in Special Session on Monday, September 14, 2026 at 10:00 am in the Auditor's Appraisal Conference Room, 231 Main Street, Chardon, Ohio. The meeting was in person with a virtual attendance option via MS Teams, and the agenda was provided in advance. To attend Budget Commission meetings virtually via MS Teams, email an invitation request to Pam McMahan at PMcMahan@geauga.oh.gov.
Meeting Attendance: Treasurer Chris Hitchcock and Auditor Chuck Walder. Prosecutor Jim Flaiz was absent due to a family emergency.
Staff Attendance: Deputy Auditors Tina Kloski and Jennifer Hess, Auditor’s Office Chief Operations Officer Pam McMahan, ADP Chief Deputy Administrator Frank Antenucci, ADP Staff Member Akshay Raikar, Auditor’s Office Senior Government Advisor Natalie Ray, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Kristen Rine (virtual), and Auditor’s Office Chief Compliance Officer & Administrator Kate Jacob (virtual).
Members of the Public: In person, Geauga Maple Leaf reporter Allison Wilson and this LWV Geauga Observer were present. Virtually, attendees included Geauga County Mental Health and Recovery Services Board Member Kathy Johnson, Geauga Public Health Finance Director Katie Taylor, Sheriff Scott Hildenbrand, and Geauga Times Courier reporter Anastasia Nicholas. Observer Note: Because this Observer attended in person, some virtual attendees may not be listed since not all names were visible on the screen in the meeting room. Some individuals attended only for specific Budget Hearings, and these people will be identified below.
The meeting was called to order at 10:03 am.
Minutes: No Minutes were presented for approval. Budget Commission Minutes can be found here when posted.
Reconvening of the 2027 Budget Hearings
Observer Note: For details on the previous portions of the 2027 Budget Hearings of Bainbridge, Chester, Hambden, Geauga County, and Russell, please see the LWVG Observer Report on the August 17, 18 and 25 Budget Hearings, available here.
1. Bainbridge Township - Trustee Kristina O’Brien and Fiscal Officer Matt Domonkos attended in person.
-
Advance Meeting: Prior to the reconvening of this hearing, there was a meeting with Ms. O’Brien, Mr. Domonkos, Police Chief Jon Bokovitz, Service Director Alex Hansel, Mr. Walder, Mr. Antenucci, and Ms. McMahan in which Bainbridge’s budget anomalies were discussed, with a focus on reserve fund management. Mr. Walder indicated that this was helpful in getting everyone on the same page.
-
General Fund: Mr. Walder said that he had previously identified money being saved for reserve elements in the general fund reserve fund that he could not connect to a reserve study. The Bainbridge Trustees have since passed a resolution adopting a reserve study from April that corrects that issue. Mr. Walder stated that about $1 million in expenditures that he had previously thought should have come from reserve funds actually were appropriately paid for out of the general fund because these expenditures were surprise repairs needed for the town hall since they were unanticipated and therefore not specifically identified as reserve fund items. Observer Note: More information on the issues with Bainbridge Town Hall are available here. The building was renovated and reopened in June 2026. Mr. Walder said that the only adjustment required for Bainbridge’s submitted general fund revenue was a decrease of $22,014 due to accidental revenue overreporting. This made Bainbridge’s general fund cash carryover 25%, which Mr. Walder called “very conservative… but you have reserves to help back that up.” Observer Note: All carryover percentages in this document were listed on slides presented by Mr. Walder. He calculated carryover percentage as cash available at the end of the year divided by 2027 operations and maintenance (“O&M”) expenses. O&M expenses are those required to “sustain life,” meaning they are essential for entity functioning, such as paying personnel. Capital expenses are not a part of O&M because they are not considered required to sustain entity life. Mr. Walder has indicated at previous Budget Hearings that generally speaking carryover should be 30-40%.
-
Road and Bridge Fund: A duplicated expenditure for a truck was identified in both the 2026 and 2027 budgets, so that added $225,000 back into 2027 Road and Bridge revenue. Cash carryover was estimated at 30%, which Mr. Walder said was “not excessive.”
-
Police Fund: Mr. Walder stated that $110,000 in 2026 HVAC expenses and $225,000 in vehicle expenses should have been paid for from reserves and not the police fund. When this money is added back into the police fund, the carryover is at 21%, which Mr. Walder said was “not a lot.”
-
Fire Fund: There were a number of increases to Bainbridge’s fire fund revenue resulting from expenses that should have been paid for from the fire reserve fund and overfunding of the fire reserve fund. When these corrections were made, fire revenue increased by $707,344.00, and carryover was 53%. However, Mr. Walder said he found out at his meeting with Bainbridge officials that the township plans to purchase a ladder truck, but they are only reserving less than half of the cost for that vehicle because the actual cost of the truck is substantially higher than estimated in the reserve study. He advised Bainbridge to have its reserve study refreshed so that the cost of the ladder truck can be updated, and then its excess fire fund money can be saved for this purpose. Ms. O’Brien said that having their reserve fund company MillerDodson update the fire reserve fund study was on the agenda for the next Bainbridge Trustees meeting. Ms. O’Brien later clarified that they plan to ask for a refresh of all of their reserve studies, not just fire. Mr. Domonkos indicated that they may establish a fire retirement reserve fund as well.
Mr. Domonkos said he estimates that the updated reserve study reflecting the increased cost of the ladder truck will result in at least an additional $650,000 being eligible to be added to the fire reserve fund. Mr. Walder said moving $650,000 into reserves to save for the ladder truck would drop the fire fund carryover to about 39%, but he indicated that the exact amount won’t be known until the reserve study update is completed. However, it was determined that Bainbridge’s original resolution establishing the fire reserve fund set its 10 year not to exceed amount at $4,863,280. Mr. Hitchcock said the fire reserve fund has about $500,000 now, so adding $650,000 would not result in exceeding $4.8 million. Therefore, he indicated that the trustees could go ahead and vote to move the money into the fire reserve fund before the reserve study updates occur. All seemed amenable to this. Ms. O’Brien said she thought that they could have a special trustees meeting for this purpose.
The Budget Commission voted to approve Bainbridge’s budget “contingent upon the action of their board to revise their reserve study to account for a significant transfer from the fire fund into the fire reserve fund to account for a change to their reserve study.” Mr. Walder indicated that they would run the numbers and have the paperwork ready at the next Budget Commission meeting and said that Bainbridge did not need anyone to attend for this to occur.
2. Chester Township - No representatives from Chester Township were present.
Mr. Walder said that Chester had out of balance transfers from 2026 that affected the 2027 beginning and ending balances. Additionally, a 2027 transfer had to be corrected to go from the general fund to the police fund, not the police reserve fund. The staff worked with Chester to clean up those transfers, but the paperwork wasn’t done in time for the August 25 reconvening of the Budget Hearings. The paperwork was completed in time for this meeting.
The Budget Commission approved Chester Township’s budget as corrected.
3. Hambden Township - Trustee Keith McClintock and Fiscal Officer Mike Romans attended in person.
-
Advance Meeting: Prior to the reconvening of this hearing, there was a meeting with Mr. Walder, Mr. Antenucci, Auditor’s Office Chief Compliance Officer & Administrator Kate Jacob, Mr. Romans and an unspecified Hambden Trustee in which concerns with Hambden’s budget were discussed. Mr. Walder indicated that many of Hambden’s issues were now resolved.
-
Road and Bridge Fund: Mr. Walder said that the Budget Commission had voted to suspend Hambden’s $113,000, 0.8 mill road levy for 2027 in August, in part because he had calculated Hamden’s Road and Bridge carryover at 108%. However, after meeting with Hambden, Mr. Walder came to understand that Hambden has embarked on creating a paving reserve fund. They have received a survey report from the County Engineer and are now working on selecting a company to do a reserve study projecting long-term road paving expenses. In light of this, Mr. Walder said he was willing to make a motion to rescind the suspension of the 0.8 mill road levy because he thinks that the $113,000 from the 0.8 mill road levy will be needed for the reserve fund. To be comfortable with this, he wanted to get an idea of Hambden’s timeframe regarding the reserve fund for paving. Mr. McClintock said they are reaching out to other townships with paving reserves and starting to request quotes from reserve companies to do the reserve study. He and Mr. Romans indicated that the reserve fund will be established no later than the first quarter next year. Mr. Hitchcock said he thought Mr. Flaiz should be present for the vote about rescinding the road levy suspension, so Mr. Walder’s motion died for lack of a second from Mr. Hitchcock.
-
Permanent Improvement Fund: Mr. Romans clarified that Hambden’s Permanent Improvement Fund with about $136,000 is used for road and bridge expenses, and no new money will be added to this fund. It will be spent down over time as road and bridge projects come up. It was noted that it shows $0 in both revenue and expenses for 2027. Mr. Walder advised that the Permanent Improvement Fund not be left sitting idle and suggested that this money could go into a road and bridge reserve fund. Mr. Hitchcock said another option would be to move it to the Road and Bridge Fund.
-
Facility Enhancement Fund: It was determined that the Facility Enhancement Fund with about $25,000 was a reserve fund. Mr. Hitchcock was concerned that it shows $0 in revenue and expenses for 2027. Mr. Romans said it will be used for enhancements for Hambden’s old fire station once it becomes property of the township. Mr. Walder expressed uncertainty about whether it is lawful to reserve for maintaining a building that isn’t owned yet and reminded all that reserve funds are only for specific purposes established when they are created. It was determined that more money could possibly be put into the Facility Enhancement Fund, as its lifetime cap is $300,000 and only about $147,000 had ever been put into it. Most of the $147,000 was spent on the recently completed town hall paving project. Mr. Walder advised Hambden to discuss this matter with its APA (Assistant Prosecuting Attorney) in order to make sure whatever is decided is true to the purpose language in the resolution creating the Facility Enhancement Fund.
-
Theft from the Fire Department: Mr. Hitchcock asked if the recently discovered theft of $1.6 million from the Hambden Fire Department affected Hambden’s 2027 budget numbers. Mr. Romans pointed out the Hambden Fire Department is a separate entity from the township. It was determined that the theft did not affect the 2027 budget numbers, as the $100,000 the township gave to the fire department in July 2026 so it could make payroll was simply an advance on a payment the township was due to make to the fire department in October 2026. Mr. Hitchcock suggested that the Hambden Trustees consider making the Hambden Fire Department a public fire company.
The Budget Commission voted to table Hambden’s 2027 budget until Mr. Flaiz could be present to weigh in on rescinding the suspension of the road and bridge levy. Mr. Hitchcock pointed out that this gives Hambden time to take action regarding its Road Permanent Improvement Fund. Mr. Walder suggested that the trustees pass a resolution showing its intent on what it wants to do with the money in this fund after getting advice from their APA. The Budget Commission also scheduled a Special Meeting for September 28 at 10:00 am to complete any unfinished 2027 Budget Hearings. Observer Note: See the Budget Commission meeting schedule at the end of this report for more details.
4. Geauga County - County Commissioner Jim Dvorak, Finance Manager Adrian Gorton, County Administrator Amy Bevan, Assistant County Administrator Mark Jimison and one other individual unknown to this Observer attended in person. Observer Note: The hearing order of Russell Township and Geauga County was switched from that listed on the meeting agenda due to a time issue on the part of some of the County’s meeting attendees.
-
Levy Reduction: As mentioned at the August 25 Budget Hearing, the County Commissioners have suspended collection of the 0.5 mill Job and Family Services (JFS) levy for 2027, which at 98% collection will result in $1,656,482 in property taxes being returned to Geauga residents.
-
Events Since the Initial Budget Hearing: Mr. Walder noted that at the county’s first Budget Hearing on August 17, it seemed the County Commissioners were open to providing taxpayers additional relief beyond the suppression of the 0.5 mill JFS levy. He said that two events that have occurred since that time have made him question the Commissioners’ commitment to tax relief for Geaugans. First, the Commissioners voted to increase the cost of dog licenses, resulting in $40,000 in additional fees/taxes paid by Geaugans. Observer Note: This was discussed in detail at the August 25 County Budget Hearing. See the link in the previous bullet point for more information (page 64). Secondly, the Commissioners gave $750,000 to the Geauga County Fair to help build a new multipurpose/expo building. Observer Note: See the LWVG Observer Report on the September 3, 2026 County Commissioners Meeting for more information. Mr. Walder expressed his support for the fair, but he noted that “the statement was made (by Mr. Gorton) at the last hearing (on August 25), that if we were to do any more relief for taxpayers, we would have to cut the county's budget…. Where are the budget cuts (to offset the $750,000)?” Mr. Gorton explained that his statement at the previous hearing was in reference to the 2027 budget, and the $750,000 would be coming out of 2026 money. He expressed the opinion that this will not change the 2027 budget numbers. Mr. Walder said the $750,000 wasn’t accounted for in the 2026 budget, and therefore the 2027 beginning balance would change because the 2026 ending balance will be affected. Mr. Gorton said that was correct, but they were hoping that “additional revenue and unused appropriations will make up the difference.”
Mr. Walder then asked why the $750,000 for the fair wasn’t a planned expenditure. Ms. Bevan suggested Commissioner Dvorak was best suited to answer this question. She indicated that administrators like herself and Mr. Gorton cannot always predict what the Board of Commissioners is going to do. She stated: “The will of the board changed as of the meeting at the fair, and they can make decisions, as you know, on anything that they wish to make decisions on, and then we're left with the back end, to try to adjust the financials, adjust priorities, to adjust to fit the decisions that the board makes.” By way of explanation, Mr. Dvorak said that giving money to the fair for the expo building had been talked about for 10 years or more, and “I just felt it was unfinished business, and I had a gut feeling to make that motion and see if it would pass, and it was seconded and voted on, and it passed.”
Mr. Walder then said he would be a no vote on the county’s budget because the money for the fair has been under consideration for years but it has never appeared in a county budget submission since at least 2019. He went on to say “there's constant chastising of people that come before the Commissioners who ask for something outside of the budget cycle, that ‘you should do this during the budget cycle.’ I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander.” Mr. Walder also said that previous statements that the County Commissioners’ Office wanted to work more collaboratively with the Budget Commission “was really just noise, because now it's a matter of, ‘well, we only do what they tell us to do.’” Observer Note: See the LWVG Observer Report on the June 15, 2026 Budget Commission Meeting for more information.
Mr. Hitchcock said that the submitted 2027 County Budget was wrong because it doesn’t reflect the $750,000 for the fair. Mr. Gorton countered that budgets are often “wrong the day after it was passed because money gets spent and appropriations get supplemented.” Mr. Walder agreed, but said budgets must be “reasonably accurate on the day it's presented.” Mr. Walder and Mr. Gorton disagreed on whether the county’s budget was accurate when it was presented. Mr. Gorton accused Mr. Walder of being “political,” and Ms. Bevan said “we have entered this in good faith.” Mr. Walder said to them: “You are here as administrative staff. Him (Mr. Gorton) talking about politics is not entering in as administrative staff. So if you want to play the game, you can't pick when you play it. You're either here answering administrative questions, or you're here debating politics.”
Mr. Walder questioned the transparency of the $750,000 given to the fair, saying this wasn’t on the Commissioners’ meeting agenda and there was no public debate about it. He also said “I think it's disingenuous to tell taxpayers, ‘we can't give you more relief. We're too busy giving it away to people at fairs.’”
Mr. Dvorak said that the fair was going to receive $700,000 or more toward the expo building from the state through State Senator Sandra O’Brien. The additional $750,000 from the county will enable the fair to do the whole building at once without having to piecemeal it together. He also noted that the Commissioners have provided tax relief by suppressing the 0.5 mill JFS levy several times in recent years. Mr. Gorton added that “the county’s given more money back to taxpayers than any of the other entities combined over the last three years.”
The Budget Commission voted to table consideration of the county’s 2027 budget.
5. Russell Township - Trustees Kristina Port and Chris Hare, Fiscal Officer Jonathan Brown, Board Administrator Warren Dovsek, and Russell residents Mike Walsh, Kate Walsh, and Matt Mesok attended in person. Observer Note: Jonathan Brown was appointed as Russell’s Fiscal Officer by Judge Timothy Grendell; he was sworn in on August 24, 2026. More information is available in this Geauga Maple Leaf article.
Before the hearing began, a Russell Township Trustees Meeting was called to order.
-
Reserve Fund Underfunding: Mr. Walder stated that the Russell Trustees had completely defunded five of nine of its reserve funds in the 2027 budget, and it was underfunding two other reserve funds, meaning they are adding less than the amount prescribed by the reserve studies associated with each reserve fund. He listed the amount each reserve fund was defunded/underfunded as follows:
-
GF (General Fund) Capital Reserve: ($ 61,513.00)
-
R&B (Road & Bridge) Retirement Reserve: ($ Unknown )*
-
R&B Capital Reserve: ($ 74,829.00)
-
Fire Capital Reserve: ($ 198,413.00)
-
Fire Vehicle Reserve: ($ 81,756.00)
-
Police Retirement Reserve: ($ Unknown )*
-
Police Vehicle Reserve: ($ 11,769.00)
-
Total Reserve Fund Underfunding: ($ 428,280.00+)
* Observer Note: The amount the two retirement reserve funds were underfunded by is unknown because it must be calculated based on how many employees there are with 20 years or more of service, and Mr. Walder did not have access to that information when coming up with these numbers.
-
Mr. Walder noted that Russell was underfunding its reserves despite being “flush with cash.” He was incredulous that they were putting no money in the R&B capital reserve to save for maintaining the road garage, which has many issues as described during the Budget Hearings in August. Mr. Walder said that at Trustees meetings there has been discussion regarding the needed repairs for the road garage possibly being too great and perhaps they should build a new road garage. He lamented that the third Russell Trustee, Amy Heutmaker, was not present to talk about this matter. He noted that when MillerDodson did its reserve study (date unknown), they rated the condition of the road garage and the township administration building as being the same. He noted that there was no talk among the Trustees of tearing the administration building down; in fact it has been improved by the township. Mr. Hare said that Russell is actively getting quotes for road garage repairs.
-
Ms. Port said she had been unaware they could establish a road paving reserve. Mr. Walder countered that, according to Trustee meeting minutes, in 2025 the Fiscal Officer (Karen Walder, who resigned effective June 2026) recommended a paving reserve study to the Trustees, but they decided not to do it on the advice of the Road Superintendent.
-
Corrected Budget Numbers with 40% Carryover: Mr. Walder presented how much excess cash there was by fund over and above 40% carryover once the Russell’s budget errors were corrected. Observer Note: See the LWVG Observer Report on the August 17, 18 and 25 Budget Hearings for more information on the errors in Russell’s original budget submission.
-
General Fund excess cash over and above 40% carryover: $ 579,010
-
Road and Bridge excess cash over and above 40% carryover: $ 1,089,700
-
Fire excess cash over and above 40% carryover: $ 0
-
Police excess cash over and above 40% carryover: $ 557,459
-
Total excess cash that could be returned to taxpayers via levy suppression: $ 2,226,169
-
Mr. Walder noted that the potential $2.2 million in levy suppression would still leave Russell with $1.4 million in reserve funds. He said part of his calculations involved considering the approximately $400,000 in the road and bridge reserve fund as unencumbered cash because Russell is not using that money to maintain its road garage, which he said was clear from the fact that over the last five years they had averaged spending only $2,000 per year on the building despite all of its problems. Mr. Hare stated that he thought it would be more responsible for Russell to spend the money in the reserve fund to make repairs rather than build a new road garage.
-
Mr. Walder said he thought there was about a million dollars in expenses in the 2027 budget for things that he would put money on never being done. He stated: “I'm challenging the very credibility that Russell has with the Budget Commission. Over the past five years, you promised and promised and promised and not delivered. That is one of the three components that the Budget Commission has to weigh: reasonableness, need, and credibility of the submission. I'm having trouble with all three of these. I don't see reasonableness, I don't see need, and the credibility is terrible.” He noted that he had difficulty getting information from Russell when he asked them questions about the budget as he was reviewing it. He also said that the number and type of errors in Russell’s budget were “unprecedented,” as were the number of adjustments he had to make to fix all of the problems with the budget.
-
Police “Defunding”: Mr. Walder spoke to accusations that the Budget Commission would be “defunding” the Russell Police Department via levy suppression. He noted that the Russell Trustees original intention was to suppress some police levy money. He said that the police department has “... too much money. That's not taking a service away. It's taking cash out of the bank. That's not defunding them.” He went on to say that all of Russell’s levy money the Budget Commission is considering suppressing is not being used to provide services, but instead is doing nothing but earning interest. Ms. Heutmaker’s press release and youtube video regarding her opinions on Russell’s Budget Hearings came up, and the other Trustees indicated that she was speaking for herself. Mr. Hare said “when we (the Budget Commissioners, Mr. Hare and Ms. Port) discussed the police levy in regards to reduction, I think we all sat here in agreement and realized we were not doing anything nefarious in regards to defunding the police. And I could say that's certainly not my opinion on what the Budget Commission recommended, or even the action that yes, we took ourselves.” Ms. Port said she had not put her name on any accusations and indicated that the only discussions she has had on the matter have been before the Budget Commission in an open setting. Mr. Walder decried Ms. Heutmaker’s lack of attendance during any of the Budget Hearings and said she’s “saying statements that are just categorically false (regarding the Budget Commission defunding the police). The Budget Commission is not defunding the police. We are questioning the cash you have in the bank.”
-
Reserve Funds Revisited: Ms. Port said she would like to fund all of Russell’s existing reserve funds according to the reserve study recommendations. Mr. Walder said only the Budget Commission is allowed to make changes to revenue and expenditures until October 1, and then the budget is locked in until January 1. Mr. Hitchcock asked if the Budget Commission can require Russell to make transfers into its reserve funds to fully fund them. Mr. Walder said he was not certain that they could, because a transfer out may not be considered an expenditure. He asked for the opinion of Assistant Prosecutor Kristen Rine, and she said the matter would require research before she would be comfortable giving an opinion. Ms. Port continued to emphasize her desire to find a way to have the reserves funded “the way it should have been.” Mr. Walder said the Trustees could pass a resolution stating they will fully populate the reserve funds on January 1. Mr. Hitchcock agreed with this approach. Mr. Hare said it would clearly state the Trustees’ intention. There was uncertainty about the exact amount needed to fund all the reserves, but the estimate was $425,000-$450,000. Mr. Walder pointed out that Russell had actually overfunded two reserve funds, so after correcting for that $425,000 should be roughly the amount needed.
-
Carryover Revisited: Mr. Hitchcock said he thought carryover over 25% was “gravy.” He asked Mr. Walder what the calculation for 30% carryover would be. Mr. Walder said it would result in $2,899,031 being returned to Russell taxpayers. Mr. Hitchcock said this number doesn’t reflect fully funding the reserves. Mr. Walder expressed the opinion that transfers are not expenditures and therefore it may not be in the Budget Commission’s purview to mandate funding for the reserves. He also said he was hesitant to dump a large research project on the Prosecutor’s Office to research the matter when the deadline for the Budget Commission to complete its work on the budgets was only about two weeks away. Mr. Walder said he preferred the 40% carryover, and then Russell could use the 10% more of available cash to fund its reserves if it chose to do so. Mr. Hitchcock said he still preferred 30% carryover, and he made a motion to this effect. Mr. Walder pointed out that this would take $2.89 million from Russell plus $425,000 more if Russell fully funds its reserves. Mr. Hitchcock amended his motion to adjust Russell’s budget to 40% carryover with the assurance that the Russell Trustees will make their reserve payments as of January 1, 2027 and asked for a second, which was not received.
Mr. Walder then pointed out that, using Russell’s originally submitted numbers, a 40% carryover results in about $1.7 million being returned to Russell residents, and using the corrected budget numbers, 40% carryover results in about $2.2 million being returned to Russell residents. He noted that the difference between those amounts was about $500,000, which is roughly the amount needed to fully fund the reserves. Mr. Walder said he was considering what would happen if the Budget Commission’s decision on Russell’s budget was appealed to the state Tax Commissioner, which he said Ms. Heutmaker has threatened to do. He said he didn’t think anyone could argue with using Russell’s own budget numbers and then reducing carryover to 40%. He said that the smartest thing to do was what could be defended easiest before the Board of Tax Appeals, and he thought that would be suppressing $1.7 million, with the caveat that the Trustees guarantee that they will fully populate the reserve funds. Mr. Walder then motioned to suppress $1.7 million of Russell’s levy money and asked for public comment before a decision was made.
-
Public Comment:
-
Russell resident Kate Walsh expressed appreciation to Mr. Walder and Mr. Hitchcock for their hard work and knowledge. She said she supported 30% carryover. She stated: “It has to stop. We're incompetent as a community with the money.”
-
Russell resident Mike Walsh expressed his admiration for the Budget Commissioners’ work and acknowledged the time put in on the budget by the Russell Trustees. He said he had noticed that “the township, in many cases, made the decision, ‘we can put that off until next year,’ and I think I'm hearing that's not a good idea. If you budgeted it for this year, maybe you can put it off a year, but you should spend it this year.” Mr. Walder responded “I'm not an advocate of spending just because the money's there. I think good proper management of resources is healthy. I think I hear what you're saying. I think the township has good intentions, but they think that appropriating it is the same as doing it.”
-
Russell resident Matt Mesok said he appreciated the work of the Budget Commissioners and commended Mr. Hare and Ms. Port coming to the budget hearings. He said “I've been to almost every single township (trustees meetings) in the last year and a half. And I keep hearing 30% carryover, 30% carryover. I am strongly suggesting we go 30%. The less money a government has… the less likely they are to spend it.” He asked for an estimate of how much money would be going back to Russell homeowners if the township’s carryover were cut to 30%, meaning about $2.89 million in levy suppression. Mr. Walder cautioned that he would be doing some rounding to do this calculation quickly so the number wouldn’t be perfect. He came up with about $253.75 being returned to homeowners per $100,000 of home valuation in this scenario. He said this would be for one year, and he was worried about the effect of suppressing taxes for one year: “when this happens, everybody thinks that's their tax base now, and then it comes back on the rolls the year after, everybody goes ‘my God, taxes went up!’ No, they went back where they were. The reduction went away, and the shocker for people is when they're going to the ballot on new issues. They're looking at their current tax bill and said, "I'm down 1,000 bucks. I'm willing to pay more money now for this event. And then the tax comes back on the rolls, and it goes exponential. That's the fear I have with what we do. That's the downside, because this should be done at the front end, not the back end. We're doing this backward.” Mr. Mesok asked if the Budget Commission’s levy reductions could be permanent. Mr. Walder said the Budget Commission doesn’t have that authority. He encouraged the public to attend Budget Hearings each year to be a part of the budget conversations.
-
Actions Taken:
-
Mr. Hitchcock withdrew his previous motion.
-
Mr. Walder amended his previous motion to suppress $1.7 million of Russell’s levies to add the requirement that the township fully fund its reserves. Mr. Hitchcock pointed out that the Russell Trustees present had convened a meeting and could make a decision on funding the reserves now. There was some back and forth about whether the Trustees would do this, with the ultimate decision being that they would.
-
Mr. Hare made a motion that the Russell Trustees commit to fully funding the reserve accounts as laid out in their reserve studies. The motion passed.
-
Mr. Walder then stated that the Trustees could act to accept the $1.7 million levy reduction at this meeting and therefore “get the credit.” There was discussion about what the precise amount would be (see the motion below). Mr. Mesok asked to speak and said he thought the matter should be brought before the community at a trustees meeting so more residents could comment. It was pointed out that the current trustees meeting had been advertised to the public, and Mr. Mesok withdrew his objection. Mr. Hare made a motion that the Russell Trustees accept the Budget Commission’s recommendation to suppress levies totaling $1,693,361. The motion passed.
-
Mr. Walder’s motion to approve Russell’s budget, accept the levy suppression $1,693,361, and require that the township fully fund its reserves, was seconded by Mr. Hitchcock. Public comment was solicited again. Ms. Rine asked what specific levies would be suppressed. After discussion, it was determined that the following levies would be suppressed for one year: 2.5 mill 2025 Police Levy ($987,573), 1.1 mill 2013 Road & Bridge Levy ($303,871), and the 1.5 mill 2014 Police Levy ($414,370). This adds up to $1,705,814 in levy suppression. Mr. Hare made a motion that the Russell Trustees amend the previous motion to name the levies suspended (listed above) and update the amount suspended to $1,705,814. The motion passed.
-
The Budget Commission then voted to approve Russell’s 2027 budget with the $1,705,814 in levy suppression.
The Russell Township Trustees Meeting was adjourned.
Regular Business
The following Amendments were approved:
Reviewer Note: An explanation of the different types of funds in revenue certifications can be found
here.
-
Chardon Local School District - Amendment #2. $57,413,626.14 in the general fund, $5,969,558.94 in special revenue funds, $451,249.91 in debt service funds, $2,484,632.27 in capital project funds, $9,400,367.93 in internal service funds, and $146,905.60 in fiduciary funds for a total of $75,866,340.79.
Chardon Schools’ amendment certified the increases in the general fund and special revenue funds as well as a decrease in capital project funds. Chardon Schools Treasurer Deb Armbruster, who was present in person while this amendment was being considered, said she had submitted a Chardon Board of Education resolution moving 1 mill of Chardon Schools’ inside millage from permanent improvement to the general fund, and she asked if that was approved by the Budget Commission. Observer Note: See the LWVG Observer Report on the August 17, 2026 Chardon Board of Education Meeting for more information on this resolution. It was determined that the inside millage shift was a part of the materials submitted by the district with this amendment, which means it has been approved by the Budget Commission. Mr. Walder noted that this inside millage shift has no effect on the taxes paid by residents of the Chardon School District. Ms. Armbruster then departed the meeting.
-
Cardinal Local School District - Amendment #1 - Corrected. $22,872,816.96 in the general fund, $1,335,004.63 in special revenue funds, $650,300.27 in debt service funds, $1,357,473.47 in capital project funds, $648,008.33 in enterprise funds, $3,306,000.00 in internal service funds, and $53,143.46 in fiduciary funds for a total of $30,222,747.12.
The correction of Cardinal’s amendment #1 reflected increases in enterprise funds, internal service funds, and fiduciary funds, as well as decreases in the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, and capital project funds relative to the amounts presented when this amendment was originally approved at the July 20, 2026 Budget Commission meeting. The reason why the correction was needed was not explained.
Other Business
A $5,000,000 cash transfer from the BODD general fund to the BODD client service fund for Medicaid waver match and administrative fees as well as locally funded client services was approved by the Budget Commission.
A $6,000 appropriation transfer (consisting of $2,000 from unemployment, $3,000 from other state tax expenses, and $1,000 from advertising) to other county tax expenses was approved by the Budget Commission.
General Discussion - N/A
Public Comment:
This Observer asked for clarification on the Budget Commission’s meeting schedule for the rest of September. There are meetings scheduled for September 21, 28, and 30, but the staff said it is possible that there may be meeting cancellation(s) and they would reach out once that was determined. Observer Note: This Observer received notification that the September 21 Budget Commission meeting was cancelled via email from the Auditor’s Office staff. This Observer also requested a copy of all materials from this meeting, which were received via email on September 15 & 16, 2026.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:12 pm.
Next Meeting: The next Budget Commission Meeting for the Reconvening of the Annual Tax Budget Hearings and Regular Business will be on September 28, 2026 at 10:00 am in the Auditor's Appraisal Conference Room, 231 Main Street, Chardon. There is also a Special Meeting for reviewing Rate Resolutions and Regular Business on September 30, 2026 at 10:00 am in the Auditor's Conference Room, 215 Main Street, Chardon. Virtual attendance for Budget Commission meetings is available via Microsoft Teams by emailing an invitation request to Ms. McMahan at PMcMahan@geauga.oh.gov.
Observer: Sarah McGlone
Editor: Gail Roussey
Reviewer: Rooney Moy
Submitted: September 22, 2026
The League of Women Voters of Geauga is a 501(c)(3) nonpartisan political organization that encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and advocacy. They do not support or oppose individual candidates or parties. Learn more about the LWVG at www.lwvgeauga.org.