Lebanon County budget proposal for 2026 reveals a $5 million-plus deficit

This article was funded by LebTown donors as part of our Civic Impact Reporting Project.

Lebanon County has a projected shortfall of more than $5 million as county officials prepare for fiscal year 2026, it was announced Thursday, Oct. 23, following week-long budget hearings. 

That amount is estimated before county officials meet in November to discuss personnel heading into the new fiscal year, which begins on Jan. 1. As of Thursday, Lebanon County had about 640 of slightly more than 700 existing part-time and full-time positions filled, according to Michelle Edris, director of human resources.

“$5,042,600 deficit as of today. That’s been reduced by $1,316,000 since Monday,” said county administrator Jamie Wolgemuth on Thursday after the meetings.

It’s too early to determine what county officials will do to achieve a balanced budget, but their options are limited. They can raise taxes, cut spending, borrow money, or tap into county reserves, according to Wolgemuth. 

In the case of some services they offer, they are mandated by the state or federal government to have them, while the Lebanon County Correctional Facility is a necessary service to ensure public safety. 

County commissioners, the county administrator, a representative from the county controller’s office, and each of the county’s 32 department heads met about 13 hours over four days this past week to review their proposed departmental budgets.

LebTown attended about seven hours of the meetings on Monday and Thursday to learn more about the budget process and ask questions as they arose.

Some of the meetings were relatively short, such as for departments with limited line items in their budget like at the Renova Center, the county-owned 24-bed, intermediate care facility for individuals with medium to severe intellectual disabilities. The center’s 2025 budget was $120,000, and the ask for 2026 was also $120,000. 

Most individual budget sessions were scheduled to run between 10 to 20 minutes. Other departments, like the district attorney’s office and prison, are scheduled for 60 minutes. The county’s court system runs 75 minutes since the courts, law library, probation, and domestic relations all fall under the purview of the courts. 

For most departments, but especially those with complicated budgets, the process followed a review of the 2025 budgeted amount and year-to-date expenditures by line items. Based on the current expended amount officials discussed whether the same line for the 2026 budget should be decreased, increased, or held steady. Wolgemuth led the discussion with each department head and commissioners followed closely along during the portions attended by LebTown. 

For many departments, commissioners made few or no comments as budgets were presented and discussed. Wolgemuth led the discussion and occasionally asked Angel Price, first deputy controller, about a particular figure or information displayed on her laptop computer. Most discussions were between Wolgemuth and department directors.

For example, with probation services, director Audrey Fortna responded to Wolgemuth’s comment that it appeared that operational expenses were actually going down 5 percent, from $310,000 to $293,000, and that building and space and utilities were going down from $70,000 to $60,000.

“Correct. We had the reconstruction remodel this past year and we built in extra fees for duct cleaning and for floor services and so those were added into Building in Space last year. So I didn’t count those again,” Fortna said. 

The budget process is a window into what has happened in this fiscal year and a look at what’s to come next year. Additionally, in the case of the social service agencies, court system, and DA’s office, budget discussions tap into the community’s pulse across the Lebanon Valley.

Under probation services’ maintenance agreements and contracts, electronic monitoring expenses are going from $76,000 to $70,000.

“We’ve seen an overall decrease in numbers of cases coming in, so that involves a decrease,” Fortna said. “What we’ve seen is a decrease in electronic monitoring as well. It is still being utilized quite frequently in place of incarceration, but we just thought we could take a couple thousand dollars off of there based on where we were this year.”

Fortna was asked if there “are fewer individuals being sentenced or fewer coming through the system,” which she said was correct. “The other thing is we renegotiated the contract last year and the cost went down,” she said.

“But there are fewer cases coming through the system,” added President Judge John C. Tylwalk.

There was another reason for lower numbers, according to Tylwalk.

“So one of the other things that has impacted electronic monitoring is a new court decision that impacts being able to count DUIs that were served on ARD as part of a prior record. And so the district attorney has been putting off sentencing some of the DUIs until there is a resolution, and I believe it’s being challenged,” Tylwalk said. 

A legislative solution is anticipated in early 2026, he added. 

“I know in talking to other president judges statewide, there’s a lot of people that are just kind of on hold until we’re waiting for this legislative correction,” Tylwalk added.

While the budget talks are usually serious, there are moments of levity – such as when the law librarian was asked if she could get copying revenue in her department from a couple hundred dollars a year to $5 million. That’s an especially tough “ask” for someone new to the agency after her predecessor worked there for over 40 years. It was jokingly stated that she had the next 40 years to get the copying fees up to that amount.

Penn State Cooperative Extension

On a more serious note, a discussion between commissioners occurred Thursday during a presentation by Penn State Cooperative Extension officials about funds provided by the county. The county provided $457,020 in 2025 and the request of $501,587 for 2026 represents an increase of 9.3%. 

After it was noted that the ask was “typical throughout Class 5 counties” (mainly for cost of living increases, salary and fringe benefits as well as capital expenses), Commissioner Jo Ellen Litz stated her opposition to providing county funds to extension. 

Litz said the office supports other counties and those municipalities are not providing funding back to Lebanon County for the services they receive. Also, she said, Lebanon Valley College provides local services and receives no financial support from the county. 

(Penn State is a state-related institution while Lebanon Valley College is a private entity. Additionally, 66 of 67 Pennsylvania counties, excluding Philadelphia, provide funding to their local extension offices.)

“We started with a $6.3 million dollar deficit. The last I heard we were down to $5.1 million. We have to pull the reins in somewhere. I think this is a perfect place so that we are being responsible to our taxpayers with what is mandated for us to provide,” Litz said. “And I just want you to understand my position, but that’s where I’m at.”

During her presentation, Amy Bradford, an extension client relationship manager, said Lebanon County is the fourth largest agricultural county in the commonwealth, and the industry generated $664.4 million in the county, according to agriculture census data. Many of the services offered by extension are designed to make farmers more productive.

When LebTown asked Litz for comment, especially given the return on investment as cited by Bradford, she credited several programs, including agronomy, 4-H and Master Gardeners as worthwhile endeavors. However, she said others duplicate services offered by the county conservation district, to which Litz is the county’s representative.

However, Frank Mazza, director of government affairs for the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania, provided this response to Litz after she contacted him for comment. 

“As far as overlap between both, generally speaking there is not much because each has a very different core mission. CD’s (conservation districts) exist to provide technical assistance, program oversight, permit reviews, etc.” Mazza wrote in his response. “Most have delegation agreements with DEP (Department of Environmental Protection) for enforcement of certain statutory responsibilities like Sec. 102 or 105 permit reviews. Extension is more focused on research and education. There is overlap in the areas of interest, but the core function of each is different.”

LebTown asked in a follow-up email to Litz if Mazza’s information changed her views on financial support for the extension service. Litz wrote that, while she has two family members with Penn State degrees and always has supported 4-H, Master Gardeners for home gardens, and Del Voight’s crop services for farmers, she can’t support the extension when there’s a $5 million deficit and a 10% increase in the 2026 budget request.

She sent a second email touting the benefits of Pennsylvania’s conservation districts, adding that they “are mandated, and Extension is a college.” Although conservation districts are not mandatory, there are 66 located throughout Pennsylvania, with Philadelphia County the sole exception.

Commissioners Robert Phillips and chairman Mike Kuhn both vocalized their continuing support of the cooperative extension’s many educational outreaches and overall mission. 

“My point of view is that agriculture is the No. 1 industry in our county. Thousands of people are involved in it. You (Bradford) mentioned 200 farms and just the whole big picture of what we have to offer our county residents, and so 8% is a jump. It was close to 8% last year as well,” Phillips said. “But we realize that here with our cost of employees and trying to retain people that are high quality and so on. So to me it’s a good investment, and I appreciate everything you guys do and everything that folks out at the center do.”

Kuhn said he wanted to piggyback on his colleague’s comments. 

“I look at the return on our investment, particularly in 4-H programs. I don’t know how you put a price on that. The return that we’re getting, how many kids are involved in the good work that they’re doing. And I do appreciate all that you do. It’s just who pays for it,” Kuhn said. 

Lebanon County Correctional Facility

Several major capital improvements are being proposed at the county prison for 2026. 

Warden Tina Litz highlighted needed improvements to the prison, including the installation of a new boiler and laundry dryers, the latter an operation she says runs 24/7 at the prison.

The total cost of all seven proposed capital improvement projects presented by the warden is just under $870,000.

Those improvements and their projected costs are:

• Security upgrades – $400,000. This is the second of four planned phases to enhance and modernize prison security. 
• Boiler replacement – $384,000. The proposal would replace the two original boilers that were installed at the prison when it was constructed in the late 1970s. It was noted that both boilers are about “26 years past their life expectancy.” This project includes replacement of the heating exchanges and other support equipment. 
• HVAC automation – $28,400.
• Facility laundry dryers –  $20,800. Replacement of two dryer stacks (four dryers) that are about 25 years old. Replacement parts are unavailable for the obsolete units. 
• Pavement project – $13,300. Resealing of macadam areas on the prison property.
• Flooring improvements – $12,100. Upgrades to flooring in the prison chapel and administrative offices.
• Technological upgrades (Oracle) – $11,000. Wolgemuth told LebTown the item was included with capital projects but may be removed before a final budget is presented.

LCCF healthcare services

Another discussion was over the county’s current medical provider at the prison. A topic brought up in the past by Jo Ellen Litz, she again asked for the county to seek competitive pricing by requesting bids for that contract. 

In the midst of a current contract with Harrisburg-based PrimeCare Medical, Wolgemuth said the county can decide to bid it at any time because there is an early-out clause in the contract. 

He did, however, caution commissioners against making a move based on what recently happened in Dauphin County, where officials requested new bids for a prison healthcare provider and saw “their costs increase substantially.”

“I mean, it’s the board’s choice. I know that this number is going to look a lot scarier if we put it out to bid,” Wolgemuth said.

The warden agreed with Wolgemuth.

“I can tell you that from a management nightmare, and again dollars and cents are important, it would be a nightmare,” Tina Litz said. “Knock on wood, to date, we’ve had no bad outcomes with our current medical provider. They meet the contract request as far as psych, the psychiatrist, the social workers, the doctors and all that. We hold them accountable.”

Wolgemuth said a reason Dauphin County rebid theirs is because of 22 deaths over a five-year period, and there are numerous explanations provided as to why that happened.

“But we’ve just, you know, we’ve been with them since 2019, as she said, we were forced into this by another circumstance and I think it’s gone well. There are more and more companies it seems across the nation that are providing this, but they’re national companies,” Wolgemuth said.

Phillips questioned the timing of the request, adding he’d be willing to have that discussion at a future public meeting. 

“I just don’t understand the timing. We went through this whole thing last year. … This year is a fait accompli. We’re not going to re-bid it before the end of this year to get a new number,” he said. “If you’re going to have a discussion about rebidding, this is not the time for that.”

Commissioner Litz responded that she has tried to have that conversation in the past but her request to seek bids has been ignored. 

“I think that it’s good and healthy to have competition,” she told Phillips. “I don’t want anyone getting too comfortable.”

Phillips responded by asking if she heard what was just said about competition, meaning Dauphin County’s costs rose substantially after they sought new bids.

“Did you hear what he just said about the competition and how it opens us up for a higher rate than we’re experiencing now with the percentage increases that we have? Are you not listening to that?” Phillips asked.

“I heard what he said. I still have a view that competition is healthy,” she replied.

“Well, I’m not interested in talking about it any further today. It’s not going to change this year’s outcome. If you want to bring it up and we have a full discussion about it at a public meeting, I’d be happy to be involved in that,” Phillips said. 

It was noted that conversation should occur at a prison board meeting.

What’s next

The proposed 2026 budget will be presented at a public meeting on Dec. 4 and then be available for review for 20 days. Commissioners will hold a special meeting on Dec. 24 after the review period ends to vote on it. The meetings will be held at 9:30 a.m. in Room 207 at the county municipal building, 400 S. 8th St., Lebanon, and are open to the public.