Continuously serving Kosciusko County since 1854
Conflicting advice to the Kosciusko County judges and to the County Council led the council on Thursday to table the 2026 wages for probation officers.
The probation officers’ wages were brought up again during the council’s first 2026 budget hearing on Tuesday.
Council President Tony Ciriello, in reading the 2026 estimated and advertised budget ordinance, said, “After receiving and reviewing a letter from the general counsel at the state, it was decided by council to give the probation officers a 2% retention bonus based on their current wage (which is their 2026 wage also). That will be given to probation officers that are employed from Jan. 1, 2026, to Dec. 1, 2026. It will be a lump sum paid to them before the end of December 2026.”
He then said on Thursday, just prior to noon, the county received communication from the State Board of Accounts (SBOA), which governs what the county does with its funds and how it can spend them.
“After multiple discussions with the auditor’s office and Ricci Hofherr of the State Board of Accounts concerning probation officers’ wages, any stipend or bonus that the probation officers receive will be considered part of their salary. According to the minimum salary schedule for probation officers from the Judicial Conference of Indiana, departments shall not reduce the salaries of probation officers who were paid above the minimum salary schedule,” Ciriello said. “So, basically, what that says is any increase - whether it be a raise, a bonus or stipend - increases their salary and from that point on we pick up that amount every year.”
At the council’s Aug. 19 budget hearings, four of the judges went before the council to lay out their case for $10,000 stipends for each of the 11 probation officers for 2026, with the funds coming out of user fees. By a vote of 5-2, the council approved the stipends, with some caveats. Those caveats included that the salaries were not “locked-in mandatory” salaries, they came out of user fees, were evaluated each year and were a one-time thing.
On Thursday, Superior Court II Judge Torrey Bauer wanted to make sure he understood what he had heard Ciriello say so he could relay it to the other judges.
“We’re hearing from the State Board of Accounts information that is in conflict with the information that the judges have received directly from the General Counsel of the Supreme Court,” Bauer said. “So, if it is possible, we would like to know exactly who at the State Board of Accounts is saying that if we provide a bonus to our probation officers out of a fund specifically set aside for that purpose by the legislature, that they are stuck with that as at-will employees of the court and not the county. So if the council’s position is going to be we’re not going to appropriate that money because we believe we’re stuck because we’re being told by the State Board of Accounts, we would like to know who specifically is providing that information by name so that we can contact the General Counsel and they can speak with that individual directly and find out what legal authority they are relying upon in providing that to us.”
Ciriello said the SBOA governs everything the council does with tax dollars and that opinion just came in Thursday before noon.
“These are not tax dollars,” Bauer stated.
“I understand this is a difficult situation, but they are our governing authority we have to go by,” Ciriello said.
As it relates to tax dollars, Bauer said. He requested again the name of the person who gave the council that advice and what is their legal authority for taking that position on non-county tax dollars. Ciriello said the auditor’s office would provide the judges that information.
“None of the judges are aware of any law that’s been provided to us that establishes this as a baseline, especially not for court employees who are at-will,” Bauer said, adding that the judges will dig further into the matter.
Ciriello told the rest of the council they had the options of giving the probation officers no raise as the governor directed no state employees will be given a raise in 2026; give them a 2% raise like all other county employees; or table the matter. Probation officers are state employees paid by the county.
Wanting more clarification, Councilman DeLynn Geiger made a motion to table only the discussion on probation officers and move forward with the rest of the budget, and Councilwoman Rachael Rhoades seconded the motion, which passed 6-0. Council Vice President Kathy Groninger was absent.
Budgets & Tax Rates
Before the probation officers’ wages were discussed, Ciriello read the 2026 budget estimates for tax-levied funds.
The advertised general fund budget amount is $33,204,360. The advertised estimated tax levy amount is $15.2 million with an estimated tax rate of $0.1796 per $100 of assessed valuation, using an estimated total assessed value of $8,463,743,146.
The reassessment fund advertised budget amount is $682,583. The advertised tax levy estimated amount is $700,000, with an estimated tax rate of $0.0083.
The cumulative bridge fund advertised budget amount is $1,535,000, with the advertised tax levy estimated amount at $2.5 million and an estimated tax rate of $0.0295.
The health fund advertised budget amount is $1,247,921, with the advertised tax levy estimated amount at $1 million and an estimated tax rate of $0.0118.
The cumulative capital development fund advertised budget amount is $4,550,400. The advertised tax levy estimated amount is $3.4 million, with an estimated tax rate of $0.0402.
The advertised estimated total tax rate for 2026 is $0.2694 per $100 of assessed valuation.
“After the final budget is sent to the DLGF in October, these levies and tax rates will likely be lowered, depending on the final certified assessed values,” Ciriello said.
He then read a list of changes to budgets that were presented and partially approved at the Aug. 18-19 budget hearings.
Concerning the wage study done by WIS (Waggoner Irwin Scheele), Ciriello said the wage committee had a meeting and went over it and decided to implement it for the 2027 wages. The elected officials portion of the study showed “that we are currently paying our elected officials more than the recommended salaries so we are not changing those except for the positions that were already previously decided on. Those particular decisions were not contingent on the WIS study,” he said.
Councilman Dave Wolkins expressed a concern about the advertised estimated total tax rate for 2026 of $0.2694. This last year, it was around $0.20-$0.21, Auditor Alyssa Schmucker estimated.
“So we’re going up five-hundredths on that,” Wolkins said, but Ciriello said it won’t end up being that. Wolkins then asked when it will come down. Ciriello said once the Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF) reviews what the county submitted.
Becky Dye, auditor’s office chief deputy, said they have to advertise higher than they’re going to adopt “so we don’t get stuck.”
She said when the council adopts the 2026 budget in October and then sends it on to the state, the state will take action on it and send back to the county a 1782 Notice. “It will be accurate. It will not be that $0.2694,” she said.
Wolkins asked if they had any estimate of what they think it will be, but he was told no. He then asked how much was the county’s assessed valuation and was told it went from about $8 billion to $9 billion.
“These numbers, they scare me,” Wolkins stated.
Ciriello said the numbers will be adjusted by the DLGF, and while the tax rates will be higher than last year, they’ll still be close to last year’s and won’t be up by that much.
The council also approved the 2026 budget for the Kosciusko County Solid Waste Management District as approved. The district’s board previously approved the budget.
