[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6540904,"mediaKeyId","3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162","parentId",3751865,"title","County employees, public and civil grand jury urge supervisors to preserve counsel, PIO and behavioral health roles","audioSeconds",466,"startMs",10180000,"endMs",10646000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162&start=10180&end=10646","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162/thumbnail_10180000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6540904/San-Benito-County/California/County-employees-public-and-civil-grand-jury-urge-supervisors-to-preserve-counsel-PIO-and-behavioral-health-roles","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6540904-6bd6ebfd5d1ea020bf9dee411dd5cf84/orig.mp4?Expires=1771110411&Signature=gRlsx1-E9Cr9Uym81h81ArupGpNM7a5vPdHXODWuMQw1PzlPC8a--I1ob~4ndnO8grIg3GdalCsp52xXfHbEDAqdfxVtsUwIS38QKQUfFIr~yHDueB9gnG8de7hLWzvkCisqxwbvJweiT31ufVLGCPjO4exOu32hf9IuloXPWRl8gxOunDNvz8ztG5pI2q8aVZHU4y6clbtcPne2ty2z3rmw8fRuJbdDriVMWbEoOjmPETTB2UIDYUs1g8jnmEwfgWYOlmLC5H1bzQ6ORYpYEykpR-Lfmp47k0L845BJxyDBJXJBlFPOJe4usdd6JWZ9NApyR8~e5x1qbwbMeruq4Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-06-11T02:01:11.093Z","article","Public comment at the June 9 San Benito County budget hearing focused heavily on staffing proposals in the recommended budget and on the potential effects of cutting certain county positions.

Deputy County Counsel Shirley Murphy urged the board not to eliminate county counsel positions or to replace legal services with a private‑law contract as a cost‑saving measure. Murphy said the county’s hybrid in‑house/contract model had preserved institutional knowledge and that eliminating local counsel positions would not necessarily save money once transition and contract costs were considered.

Members of the county council staff and the county’s public‑defense oversight and invoicing staff described how their roles support other departments; one staff member said she handles 300–500 invoices a year and that losing the position would create payment and reimbursement problems that outside counsel could not perform because of limited system access.

A number of speakers asked the board to preserve the public information officer (PIO) position. County communications staff and community members warned that eliminating the PIO role would reduce the county’s capacity to deliver emergency and public‑health messages, pointing to wildfire, flood and pandemic risks as reasons to keep consistent communications capacity in house.

Representatives of the civil grand jury and the superior court asked the board not to slash the grand jury budget. Speakers said the civil grand jury performs independent oversight that benefits the public and produces reports that identify savings and improvements across county government.

Behavioral health leadership asked the board to preserve clinical positions. Behavioral Health Director Dana Edgel said staffing shortages for clinicians create risks to service continuity for people with serious mental illness and substance use disorders, and that reductions could put the county at risk of failing state network adequacy or triggering financial sanctions.

Assessor Tom Slavich and other department heads urged caution before eliminating positions in areas that directly affect revenue collection and statutory duties, noting that cutting critical staff could reduce long‑term revenue and increase costs.

Several supervisors and staff acknowledged the comments and asked for additional meetings with affected departments to get more detail before final decisions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","San Benito County Board of Supervisors Special Meeting - June 9, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Dozens of employees, department heads and members of the public urged San Benito County supervisors on June 9 to preserve county counsel, public information, civil grand jury and behavioral health staff as the board weighs FY2025‑26 budget reductions.","taxTitle","San Benito County, California","taxId",26838,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6540909,"Library expansion, ARPA projects and roads emerge as central tradeoffs in San Benito County budget talks",72,4847000,4919000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162&start=4847&end=4919","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162/thumbnail_4847000.jpg","/articles/6540909/San-Benito-County/California/Library-expansion-ARPA-projects-and-roads-emerge-as-central-tradeoffs-in-San-Benito-County-budget-talks","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6540909-58ac8cb95ae0d7e7252242fbcc9d0d00/orig.mp4?Expires=1771110411&Signature=NxI5sXbCz-zqzhb0RQRg-a9I0HWT1fKDiBal3WrX624KTSLb4lMIEG6Wqz3YmVZFZP~hDj61ocYNdWUHJn5rWp3VpkdUi6t4NGoWwo1d0~MQaOf7GOlEWGEWacqEuv7B--9blROXJfAXUtBWHG0BMCyxRNM89A~tcT5eZ-FQ5lPI7DsZ4Cu3NRv2mn2fCWEawS5~l0mrg-UXPun0VOWsNlFEWZ2rW~o-36OhN7G5TrSQA1C4JnNRwqVYM9xx8Q2WXfuWnWqqQNUe8SZC2e23L919CFNT4l~4kSXG5ZArZbeGctzbHfI8Gne0zQOq27XjgSodW0G2w5n6-TAmc4Gfmw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The June 9 budget hearing highlighted a set of large one‑time projects that staff and the Baker Tilly consultants said help explain why the published FY2025‑26 appropriations appear much larger than the county’s baseline operating needs.

Staff identified approximately $28 million in proposed transfers out and capital allocations for FY2025‑26, including a library expansion project, sheriff communications, facility repairs and a set of prior ARPA projects. County staff said the library portion of the county’s plan included roughly $4.7 million in state aid plus a general‑fund contribution that staff presented as part of the recommended budget; the recommended budget also listed about $9.1 million in transfers related to the library expansion schedule in the proposed CIP materials.

Public works staff explained the practical limits of pausing projects this year. \"If we defer the general‑fund roads money now, we will lose the construction season,\" Public Works administration said, noting that some state capital opportunities and storm‑repair grants (a state Housing and Community Development allocation discussed in the hearing) may not be available quickly enough to replace general‑fund transfers. Steve Toler and county public works staff briefed the board that an HCD program could provide about $11 million for eligible infrastructure but that the county would have to assemble projects, designs and environmental clearances to apply; projects under that program would likely be ready to move only in 2026 construction season if approved.

The library project is funded in part by a state library grant. Public works staff cautioned the board that down‑scoping the project or pausing it would require explicit consultation with the state grantor and a renegotiation of the grant scope. \"We’d have to go back to the state and show a revised scope if we cut the county’s match,\" a staff member said.

Board members disagreed about which capital items to prioritize. Several supervisors said road projects are a top local priority and requested that board direction retain the county general‑fund roads allocations for the upcoming construction season; other supervisors said the library and several ARPA projects are important community investments and urged the board to examine those on a project‑by‑project basis rather than make blanket cuts. The final board direction at the June 9 hearing asked staff to prepare a placeholder FY2025‑26 budget that keeps roads and an essential sheriff communications project active while identifying other ARPA and capital projects to temporarily unfund pending a more detailed review.

Public commenters including the county library manager and city and county staff urged the board to consider grant timelines and the practical consequences of pausing projects during the construction season. Manny Gonzalez (temporary assistant CAO assigned to library) told the board the library team was willing to work with the budget team to identify realistic scope reductions if that is the board’s direction, but he also warned that state grant and project timelines make an immediate pause disruptive.

Staff and consultants said the treatment of large one‑time projects in the county’s published budget makes the county’s year‑to‑year published appropriations appear much larger than the underlying operating budget. They urged clearer segregation of one‑time capital spending from the operating baseline so the board and public can see the county’s ongoing structural position.","Large one‑time capital projects — including a proposed library expansion, sheriff communications upgrades and ARPA‑funded projects — account for a substantial portion of the San Benito County FY2025‑26 recommended budget and frame the board’s choices about preserving services or pausing projects.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6540913,"San Benito supervisors rescind layoffs, dissolve budget management team and set placeholder budget direction",3800,9703000,13503000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162&start=9703&end=13503","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162/thumbnail_9703000.jpg","/articles/6540913/San-Benito-County/California/San-Benito-supervisors-rescind-layoffs-dissolve-budget-management-team-and-set-placeholder-budget-direction","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6540913-f34085b2fce16a223771087fd07ace69/orig.mp4?Expires=1771110411&Signature=k1tgFC4ord1UbzqbnX2r-zxTD6mqGhns~UxqJ-oXRdlhbhNLkXTCbkpeu5YV0pmPKLiQ-QFEdAsdCZwKPVa3BEM8pEee6YJBBXkElxzrG7hkG5WHeGVkyBLpBXh4s7URFg29HaFQ8Di2G4tn5GNvTKfatwfJUqqUoVjKNZ70akIYuLHkgJgcF~PvTH-IywoMxkzP9OESdLVFn7rYPp4khSIB4cP3UnneMvoKPAqWJAw5V9cJ4MzXN~2tKA~4bCA93TAJc2xGJVt-dGBddgqGFC7YKb2aAN8Gjn4JUfKiKiDM8UmtMpax2otBmspqBi50sk53PfaAVurXuVsbMR7MZw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The San Benito County Board of Supervisors took several formal steps June 9 that reshape how the county will finish its FY2025‑26 budget process.

Earlier in June the board had already rescinded potential layoff notices that had been circulated; staff reported that action to the board during the June 9 hearing. Board members and staff said that rescinding the notices was intended to give the county time to review consultant findings and refine budget decisions collaboratively with department heads.

During the June 9 session the board voted to dissolve the temporary “budget management team” (a task force formed earlier to dissect the recommended budget and advise the board). That motion passed by roll call: Supervisors Kosmicki, Zenger, Sotelo and Velasquez voted yes; Supervisor Currow recorded an abstention. The board directed that the budget ad hoc process continue in a way that complies with open‑meeting requirements and that staff and department leaders remain engaged in the review.

Later in the meeting the board adopted a motion directing staff to prepare a revised FY2025‑26 budget consistent with board guidance (a “placeholder” approach) by a 3–2 roll call: Supervisors Kosmicki, Zenger and Velasquez voted yes; Supervisors Sotelo and Currow voted no. The board’s direction to staff included the following priorities: add back filled positions the board had previously asked to protect; temporarily unfund or defer identifiable one‑time capital and ARPA projects while keeping roads projects and an essential sheriff communications project in the active construction/program list; identify additional one‑time expenditures that could be paused; and produce a revised draft for board review in follow‑up meetings prior to final adoption.

The board’s actions create a two‑step calendar: (1) finalize and adopt a placeholder spending plan so staff can operate and departments can continue service on July 1; (2) over the summer and early fall staff and the board will produce an amended budget informed by departmental input, a clearer accounting of reserves and the consultant’s recommended long‑range forecast. County staff indicated they would return with a revised draft and more detailed schedules to support the board’s final June/September decisions.

Votes and recorded motions

• Dissolve budget management team — outcome: approved; vote: Kosmicki yes; Zenger yes; Sotelo yes; Currow abstain; Velasquez yes (tally: yes 4; abstain 1).
• Direction to prepare FY2025‑26 placeholder/amended budget reflecting board changes — outcome: approved; vote: Kosmicki yes; Zenger yes; Sotelo no; Currow no; Velasquez yes (tally: yes 3; no 2).

Board members who publicly explained their votes said the actions were intended to preserve core public‑safety projects while buying time to work with department heads on structural reductions or revenue options. Several supervisors said they would continue to press for a clearer accounting of reserve categories and for departmental input before any involuntary separations occurred.","The San Benito County Board of Supervisors on June 9 rescinded earlier potential layoff notices, dissolved a recently formed budget management team and directed staff to prepare a placeholder FY2025‑26 budget while staff and consultants refine a final budget.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6540917,"Baker Tilly tells San Benito County supervisors 1-time revenues masked a structural deficit; consultants urge long-range forecast",6914,1524000,8438000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162&start=1524&end=8438","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751865-bc138c53b3f41fc7799fb697bda0c162/thumbnail_1524000.jpg","/articles/6540917/San-Benito-County/California/Baker-Tilly-tells-San-Benito-County-supervisors-1-time-revenues-masked-a-structural-deficit-consultants-urge-long-range-forecast","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6540917-18f5619a36f3f4b52f44e99ddb34dbfa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771110411&Signature=a0b9YU7qjrQ3NM6hnpf-K8~CgrlMGTU4N5qnXr-T581fp3H-L3swVRuiSqhd~KN~bEa4v-aD9v2SmUmNUC0Xl6iEKcZohpTBpmrsxzX50VdCGhPOkP55fkrJH~VhPLsjTHh0Ke7iL23ryib80bdPZIM6FBKj7urI2FtieYkXSUfeANFW2~fbsFWhNlKBKad-wKXzUFjKzuvaxI7Nh11STpB3qVr7UhbJMLBeQUE0llKQJStbfCpagiguBgy23arSDyskn6cF64CWsOGDpACqwYiHO9hjuLtUkrTMrgE~XDfoUYw~NbwJ5oB~FYi9RPQxN8382MZU8yBfaTjpUgjrvw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","San Benito County’s independent consultant Baker Tilly told the Board of Supervisors on June 9 that an analysis of the county’s recent budgets shows underlying, ongoing spending outpacing baseline revenue once one‑time grants and settlements are removed.

\"There's a story to be told here,\" Baker Tilly director Steve Toler said in his presentation, summarizing the firm’s review of five years of revenues, expenditures and reserves. The firm’s analyst, Matt Stark, showed charts the consultants said expose large swings in one‑time receipts — pandemic relief, an $6 million developer fee and insurance settlements — that inflated fund balances even as baseline spending rose.

The firm told the board the recommended fiscal year 2025–26 budget as published relies on a mix of short‑term, one‑time funds and uses reserves in a way that would leave the county with a sharply lower available balance if no structural reductions or revenue changes occur. Matt Stark said the county’s reserves grew to about $31 million during years with large one‑time revenues but projected to fall to roughly $17–18 million by year end as one‑time receipts chart downward.

Baker Tilly recommended a two‑track response: short‑term steps to adopt a legally required budget before June 30 while protecting near‑term reserve levels, and longer‑term changes including a five‑ to 10‑year financial forecast, clearer reserve reporting, and more realistic revenue and expenditure assumptions. The consultants also recommended segregating extraordinary/one‑time revenues and capital transfers from baseline operating budgets to make the county’s ongoing fiscal position clearer.

Interim County Administrative Officer Henny Ring and newly promoted budget officer Dulce Alonso joined the presentation. Ring summarized the administrative review that prompted the consultant engagement and said departments were directed last winter to identify reductions; Alonso described the County Budget Act steps that shape the schedule for publishing and adopting a recommended budget.

Board members pressed the consultants and staff on timing and the impact of specific assumptions. The board’s discussion later focused on how to convert Baker Tilly’s findings into a practical plan for the FY2025‑26 budget and directed staff to return with a revised draft under the board’s guidance.

Toler and Stark emphasized that the county’s minimum reserve policy is prudent but that the county needs a realistic, operational baseline budget aligned to long‑term forecasts. \"We think that the amounts that are included as available reserves, which is about that 17,000,000 or so, is reasonable,\" Toler said, but he added that the county still lacked a long‑range forecast to show the trajectory of pension, labor and capital costs.

The consultants left the board with short‑term options to adopt a placeholder budget immediately and use the next 60–90 days to refine a final budget with department input and a commitment to restore reserves to a policy target.","Baker Tilly, an outside public‑finance consulting firm, told San Benito County supervisors on June 9 that large, one‑time revenues have masked a structural gap between baseline revenues and baseline expenditures and urged a short‑term placeholder budget followed by a long‑range financial forecast.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

County employees, public and civil grand jury urge supervisors to preserve counsel, PIO and behavioral health roles

Library expansion, ARPA projects and roads emerge as central tradeoffs in San Benito County budget talks

San Benito supervisors rescind layoffs, dissolve budget management team and set placeholder budget direction

Baker Tilly tells San Benito County supervisors 1-time revenues masked a structural deficit; consultants urge long-range forecast