ROBERT PIERCE
• Leader & Times
Sept. 15, 2025, three county commissioners voted to exceed the Revenue Neutral Rate for Seward County’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget by more than 15 mills.
Since that time, commissioners and taxpayers alike have been investigating alleged wrongful use of county funds, and some more of the results of those investigations were presented to commissioners at last Thursday’s regular meeting.
Resident Carolyn Huddleston has been doing much of the research, and during the citizen comments portion of Thursday’s meeting, she said January pay records indicated raises going to staff of Cimarron Basin Community Corrections.
“Before these raises were granted, that agency was already in violation of one of their grant conditions, namely that their pay should be comparable to the pay for county-funded positions,” she said.
Huddleston said CBCC, which handles adult corrections, and the 26th Judicial District’s Juvenile Corrections and Prevention Services office, which handles juvenile corrections, both operate under the same statute, with Seward County operating as the host county and the commission operating as the governing authority.
“The regulations pertaining to community corrections define the county as the governing authority and say the county can hire employees to run the corrections program,” she said. “These people are county employees.”
Huddleston said JCAPS officials had written in raises for themselves in the agency’s Comprehensive Grant Plan for Fiscal Year 2027, and that plan came before the commission later in the meeting.
“For the record, JCAPS wants to take their salaries from $84,280 to $90,630,” she said.
Huddleston said JCAPS Director Chelsea Droste’s salary was slightly higher than that of Sheriff Gene Ward, who earns $84,003 at his current pay level.
“Getting this raise would place them $6,627 above him and about $20,000 above the undersheriff, who earns $70,983,” Huddleston said.
Huddleston, too, said JCAPS Juvenile Services Officer Monica Arredondo was not listed among the raises despite being second in command.
“However, she is already earning $35.88 per hour, which is $74,630 annually,” Huddleston said. “In all of the counties, there are only two individuals paid by the hour who earn more than this, and one of them is a department head.”
Huddleston then pointed out some of the other requested raises for the agency.
“One of the supervision officers at JCAPS wants $33.36 per hour instead of $31, and another one wants $31 per hour instead of $28.07,” she said. “That would mean annual salaries of $69,388 and $64,480.”
Huddleston went on to compare these to pay rates for some sheriff’s department employees.
“Let’s not forget about the rank and file deputies who are earning $22.33 per hour on the average, which is about $46,446 annually,” she said. “Make your own comparisons with any department, and I think you’ll agree these raises shouldn’t be granted. The commission has the authority to refuse them.”
Huddleston asked commissioners to tell Droste to revise her grant plan to include no raises, and she then talked about raises supposedly written into grant applications for the Seward County Health Department.
“If the plan is for these women to continue working 34 hours per week, the money put in for salaries shows a higher rate of pay than what they have been getting,” Huddleston said. “Other women may be getting raises also, but because their pay comes from more sources than what I can see, I don’t have that data.”
Huddleston then suggested commissioners ask SCHD Director Brie Greeson if she was planning for raises and for whom, and if Greeson brought matching funds down to the state’s minimum requirement, she added raises in the grants would be funded by the county and not the Kansas Department of Health and Environment due to a lack of money for the raises.
“There’s a total of $62,000 more in matching than the minimum required for the set of grants,” Huddleston said. “That’s without considering the state formula grant. What I am hoping the commission will do is make it clear to Brie there aren’t going to be any raises, and she needs to subtract the money that was reassigned to raises out of the county matching that’s earmarked for salaries.”
With many, including both Huddleston and Greeson, making light of the state’s state formula grant, Huddleston said matching amounts have risen significantly, while the grant amounts themselves have remained quite steady.
“The matching amount went up $230,000 for no reason,” Huddleston said. “The award for that grant is only around $38,000 and has been pretty constant for the last few years. However, in 2024, the matching was $402,000. By 2026, it had gone up to $650,000, and now for 2027, it’s $885,000. Why? It seems this money is getting committed in some way, and we’re at revenue neutral. Why not leave this the same as last year?”
Huddleston concluded her comments by noting four grants for services health departments often provide Greeson has not applied for yet.
“Applying for some of those additional grants could bring in more money and finance more hours for the staff to be working,” he said.
Prior to Thursday’s regular meeting, the commissioners hosted a work session to review a proposed amended budget for both the county and its Rural Fire District.
County Counselor Forrest Rhodes said, however, the county does not have the authority to reduce the mill levy through the budget process, and the mill will not change until the Board of Tax Appeals orders it.
“What will authorize the county to reduce the mill is not passing the budget,” he said. “It’s going to be compliance with BOTA’s order.”
Rhodes, though, said the county does have full control over its spending.
“If we want to amend the budget to expressly reduce what our expenditures are, recognizing what we know is going to happen with the tax revenues, that’s fine,” he said.
Commissioners voted to approve both amended budgets, with the county’s mill levy at the Revenue Neutral Rate of 41.211 mills for FY 2026 and 8.209 mills for the Rural Fire District. Both of these rates are pending formal approval or instruction from BOTA.
Some at Thursday’s meeting questioned if a public hearing was necessary for the adoption of the amended budget. Administrator April Warden said discussions with the State Division of Accounts and Reports revealed as long as funds were decreased and not increased, no budget hearing was necessary.
Warden added County Clerk Stacia Long is also not required to recertify the budget unless she chooses to do so as long as reductions and not increases were made.
As for JCAPS’s FY 22027 Comprehensive Plan Grant Application, Commission Chair Steve Helm said the plan hand no financial impact on the county or in the 26th Judicial District.
“JCAPS is reimbursed 100 percent of all operational expenses,” he said. “This is approved by the agency director and JCAPS Juvenile Corrections Advisory Board chairperson. Our recommendation is to approve the 2027 Fiscal Year Comprehensive Plan Grant application for submission to the Kansas Department of Corrections and to allow the commission chairman to sign the agreement.”
Commission Vice Chair Todd Stanton said while the funds may come from the state, they are nevertheless taxpayer funds and go through the county.
“There does seem to be a concern about the pay scales being in line with the other county salaries, and that appears to be not the case,” he said. “How are we going to bring those two in line, which is mandated?”
Droste rules and guidelines from the Kansas Department of Corrections and referenced by the Leader & Times and Huddleston were revised in December 2024.
“Under the subsection ‘Unallowable Expenditures’ under the final bullet, it says, ‘Salary and Wage Costs: Grantee may not fund bonuses or other financial incentives outside of a position’s normal salary costs with KDOC grant funds,” Droste said. “‘Grantee must demonstrate salaries for all positions are reasonable and consistent with market rates.’ It does not say county positions. It’s market rates.”
Droste said JCAPS’s market is court services, and the agency mirrors that market, and employee salaries are rates that come from the Office of Juvenile Administration and the state itself.
“It is not in line with county funds, but I am following our financial rules as it is not required in our financial guidelines,” she said.
Stanton asked to have the 26th District’s rates compared to other area judicial districts. Droste said she could get those, and she added raises recently put in were based on a quartile.
“I did not jump up to the next pay matrix,” Droste said. “I stayed within the 2024 pay matrix that was approved last year.”
Droste said the OJA quartile dictates pay goes up every four years.
“That is why Monica did not get the pay raise,” she said. “She has been a JSO for eight years, so she is capped. Myself and the rest of my staff, we all jumped up a quartile, so our pay stays stagnant for the next four years. None of us will be getting a pay raise for the next four years based off the 2024 OJA pay scale.”
Droste said one employee was scheduled to get a raise this year, but she elected to not give the raise in order to have pay available for youth resources.
“That was not within the budget for me to still be able to pay for the resources for the youth,” she said. “That is a primary concern of ours.”
Droste said under a prior JCAPS director, some staff were at OJA pay, but not all of them were.
Stanton emphasized whether the money comes from the county or the state, it still comes from taxpayer dollars.
“How do you feel this fits in with the current county policy that we’re simply not doing pay raises?” he said.
“I fully understand, and I respect that,” Droste said. “I understand what is going on with the county and the constituents within the county. I definitely understand how this looks, and I would love for it to not look that way. However, our funding does not come from that.”
Droste said while the sheriff’s office does handle tough cases on a constant basis, she emphasized that office and JCAPS are different.
“Our department mirrors Court Services,” she said. “We supervise diversion. We supervise probation. We supervise parole. We supervise bond. We also help house police protective custody youth.”
Droste said several of those cases in the past two weeks forced her to cancel her day-to-day operations for a time.
“We are starting a new early intervention program,” she said. “All of that stuff is completely separate of what the sheriff’s department does. We cannot compare to the sheriff’s department because they’re two completely different agencies.”
Stanton then asked for a chart showing JCAPS salary levels for the past five years. Droste said she does have such records.
The commission voted to table the item until its March 2 meeting to allow Droste time to obtain the records. When asked about a deadline for approval, she said she does not have to take the item before the 26th District’s other counties.
“Our agreement with the six counties is you guys are the ones who would make that determination,” she said. “I do have a deadline. I have to have this completed, approved and signed and sent to KDOC by March 15.”
