December 16, 2025, Camden County Commission meeting at 10:00 a.m.

I attended the December 16, 2025, Camden County Commission meeting at 10:00 a.m.

All commissioners were present.

The room was packed with Camden County Road and Bridge employees. I hazarded a wild guess that they weren’t there for the Bannister Hollow Road speed limit reduction.

The first agenda item was “2^nd Public Hearing: Speed Limit Reduction for Bannister Hollow Road.”

There was nobody present for or against it and it was scheduled for a final hearing at a later meeting.

The second agenda item was “Surplus Funds Request.”

The request for $72,498 had been reviewed by the County Attorney and was approved unanimously by the Commission.

The third agenda item was “Discuss Reappropriating 2007 ½ Cent Sales Tax.”

(County Auditor Jimmy Laughlin presented a Proposed 2026 Budget to the Commission on December 9, 2025. This proposed budget cut the Road and Bridge budget from $16 million in 2025 to $7.4 million in 2026 by eliminating almost every expenditure for road materials with the exception of rock salt. It also proposed cuts to the Sheriff’s budget for 2026.

During the meeting, Laughlin had trouble answering some of the Commission’s budget questions and specifically was unable to answer questions regarding how the revenue from the 2007 ½ Cent Sales Tax was dispersed among the county’s departments. The budget presentation was not well-received by the Commission or the citizens who attended the meeting.)

At this meeting, Presiding Commissioner Skelton criticized past budget spending that had neglected the county’s road and bridge department. He said that, in 2007, the voters were asked to support the Camden County Road and Bridge Department and the Sheriff’s Office with a new ½ cent sales tax. He read the ballot language that stated the tax was to be used for law enforcement improvements, road and bridge improvements, and employee retention. Skelton noted that the the 2007 ½ Cent Sales Tax had raised $91 million since its inception. Of that money, LEST (law enforcement) received $38 million, County Revenue received $43 million, but only $5 million of that revenue had been allocated to Camden County Road and Bridge.

The Commission unanimously ordered and directed that 50% of the future 2007 ½ Cent Sales Tax revenue would be used to fund Camden County Road and Bridge while the remaining 50% would be spent by the Sheriff’s Office as determined by the discretion of the Camden County Sheriff, consistent with the will of the voters.

Commissioner Gohagan stated that this diversion of the tax funds might explain why Camden County’s roads have always been in such poor condition. He felt the will of the 2007 voters had been subverted.

Commissioner Dougan was concerned about the funding of the county’s TIF projects, but Commissioner Gohagan assured him this issue would be resolved in the next agenda item because the language of the Use Tax ballot did not set requirements for its distribution.

Presiding Commissioner Skelton felt like the rest of the county government had been funded by revenue that was intended for Camden County Road and Bridge. He thought that in the future cost-cutting efforts to balance the county’s budget should be shared by other county departments instead of only the Sheriff’s Office and the Road and Bridge Department.

The Commission voted unanimously to approve the order.

The final agenda item was “Discuss Reappropriating Use Tax.”

The Use Tax ballot language authorized a 1.25% sales tax on out of state purchases to match the county total local sales tax rate at the time of the ballot (Use taxes typically tax internet sales). The Use Tax rate was intended to increase or decrease based on any changes in the county’s current local sales tax rate.

Commissioner Gohagan proposed that the sales taxes needed to fund the TIF project requirements should come from the Use Tax revenue.

The Commission unanimously directed the County Attorney to draft an order that would require TIF disbursements to come from the county’s Use Tax.

In Old Business, Presiding Commissioner Skelton read aloud the order requesting a formal audit from the State Auditor of Missouri. They asked that the State Auditor focus on the budget accounting.

Rebecca Cummins, a Treatment Court administrator, spoke before the Commission. The Treatment Court is funded by the Opioid Fund and has been trying to hire some new employees. They were having trouble tracking their expenditures through Camden County’s accounting system. She didn’t feel like the amount of expenditures and transactions documented were matching what they were actually receiving and spending. The commissioners expressed empathy with her situation and thought her questions sounded similar to their own struggles. The Sheriff agreed with her and complained that he has had the same problem: a lack of communication with the Auditor’s Office on budget issues.

The Auditor explained that they were working to resolve some of these concerns. He was not aware of the problems the Treatment Court was experiencing. Laughlin clarified that all employee line items had to be paid out of the payroll lines from one of the county’s six major funds. That was why the money had to be transferred there to be processed, adding some confusion. Laughlin said he had been busy the last few days, but he would make an effort to meet with her.

Cummins was concerned that they needed to monitor where the Opioid Fund money was spent since its use was restricted by law. The County Treasurer attempted to show her some of her financial records in an effort to explain what was happening with the money. The Treasurer suggested that giving Cummins greater access to the county’s account reporting system might make things clearer. Presiding Commissioner Skelton suggested that they arrange a meeting to clear things up.

Public Administrator Tom Gorsline sat down to speak to the Commission. Gorsline stated that the Commission used $365,000 in ARPA funds to purchase the Lighthouse building for him. Gohagan said that Gorsline had agreed to pay back the Commission for the purchase, but Gorsline didn’t think he should have to pay it back if the county used ARPA funds to buy the property.

Gohagan complained that Gorsline’s budget has increased over the past few years while his collected fees have not kept pace. He also objected to the idea that Gorsline’s office was using an attorney who is currently suing Camden County Gohagan criticized the fact that the Public Administrator’s Office includes two deputy administrators on its payroll.

Gorsline defended his efforts to represent the wards of the county. He confirmed that he was willing to contribute 75% of his fees toward the purchase cost of his building. He also defended his hiring of the former County Attorney to represent his wards because he felt he was the best attorney available. He praised the efforts of his office to remain current with their cases despite falling under the state-recommended employee numbers for his current caseload.

Gorsline stressed that he would not be able to make severe cuts to his budget. Commissioner Gohagan commented that these types of cuts were exactly what the Auditor had asked from Road and Bridge.

And that was that.

Camden County receives the majority of its usable revenue from sales taxes. Most of the other sales tax and property tax revenue is “pass-through money” that is received by the county, but then passed on to the ambulance districts, fire districts, school districts, and other taxing entities. The revenue these taxes generate varies based on how well the local economy has performed each year. The current sales tax rate for the county is 1.5% (broken down as follows) and the largest county direct revenue streams are listed below:

½ Cent Sales Tax $6 million annually

½ Cent Sales Tax (2007) $6 million annually

LEST1 ¼ Cent Sales Tax $3 million annually PSGG

LEST2 ¼ Cent Sales Tax $3 million annually PSLE

Use Tax (1.5%) $2.8 million annually

Total: $20.8 million annually

CART Funds $3 million annually Road&Bridge

Motor Vehicle Tax $900,000 annually Road&Bridge

Property Tax for Roads $2 million annually Road&Bridge

Total: $5.9 million annually

Additionally, the 2026 Proposed Budget has seen the segregation of the LEST Fund 010, the most confusing fund, into two separate budget funds: PSLE (Public Safety Law Enforcement) Fund 007 for the Sheriff’s Office and the PSGG (Public Safety General Government) Fund 020 for the rest of the law enforcement community (Courts, Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, Juvenile Detention, Child Support, etc.).

Having the entire law enforcement community’s budget fund named after the Law Enforcement Sales Tax (LEST) that provided only a fraction of its revenue stream was guaranteed to sow confusion. Hopefully, this bifurcation will make budget management easier and provide more transparency about the use of the Sheriff’s LEST2 tax revenue. Now we just need to put a swear jar up on the Commission table that people can put a dollar in every time someone still mentions “LEST”.

And, finally, here are the total appropriations for the six largest funds from Camden County’s 2026 Final Recommended Budget (which the Commission threw into the trash).

Fund Appropriations (Expenses) Proposed 2026

Fund 001 County Revenue $24 million

Fund 002 Road & Bridge $7.5 million

Fund 003 Assessment $1.9 million

Fund 010 PSLE $14.2 million

Fund 017 E-911 $1.6 million

Fund 020 PSGG $3.8 million

Enjoy and I’ll see you at the next budget meeting!