[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-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",[32,75,87,99],{"_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":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",7312662,"mediaKeyId","3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17","parentId",3795402,"title","Madera County adopts $578.4 million 2025–26 budget, leaves small operating shortfall","audioSeconds",8713,"startMs",1849795,"endMs",10563575,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17&start=1849&end=10563","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17/thumbnail_1849795.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/7312662/Madera-County/California/Madera-County-adopts-5784-million-202526-budget-leaves-small-operating-shortfall","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7312662-078702b112d4ee35de8d85298d84795c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771134729&Signature=lM2KKcyjUW1gt5yPLV-ckYTxnOPQLz1WOoTCKBkEEXiA1HfXR0TBkSKWZuRzARJy1vR~Rg5heko15cuCAt8YU2JogWr9z6U57KfXiEydUeD-y~h8SMXHq3JV1R7o9JYKdeCIVjAc6RqKhYYLqS4fFX2L3PGZheYnI7X7nel2OImGTZXMIDNN2YB9yvTIedjgSRpqt034JsYCxn20mYztTlHx7OnS3FtzbKoreDAha9egs-XePrlpvTuUIyxxhYynrfNlFf1vZGBvk~6unmWUtCnmrxA7djitwWXvJnu5ATyveqmkZcP4cXMfNQJtK6JPXKuMOEj28fW7X8clwg6fsg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Madera County","date","2025-06-10T09:41:54.977Z","article","The Madera County Board of Supervisors on Monday adopted a proposed operating budget of $578,436,287 for fiscal year 2025–26 after a public hearing and department-by-department presentations.

The board voted 5–0 to approve the plan; Supervisors Rogers, Porteous, Womack, McCauley and Chair Gonzales voted yes. Supervisor Rogers moved to approve the fiscal budget; a second was not specified in the hearing record.

Why it matters: County leaders said the budget narrows a multiyear deficit but leaves limited flexibility. Jay Varney, Madera County chief administrative officer, told the board the budget reflects an overall increase of just over $47 million across all county funds and that projected county revenues for the year will be “just a touch over $108,000,000.” Varney said the county still faces revenue headwinds from weak sales-tax growth and lower agricultural property values.

Key figures: The proposed budget recommends funding 1,754.75 full‑time equivalent positions, a net decrease of 22.25 funded positions and an unfunding of 41 positions overall; county officials said those positions are currently vacant and no layoffs will be triggered. The proposed operating deficit is $1.2 million; conservative assumptions about salary savings put the projected year‑end deficit at about $748,000 and an estimated ending fund balance reserve of $319,000.

Public safety, retiree health costs and special revenues: County administration said discretionary revenues remain concentrated in public safety, which receives about 73% of discretionary funding. Staff also flagged rising retiree‑health premiums as a primary driver of increased costs, noting a year‑over‑year retiree health premium increase of about $1.1 million tied in part to recent federal changes. The budget also reflects timing differences in election reimbursements and a near‑$700,000 reversion on CalFire cooperative agreement charges after a one‑time state infusion in the prior year.

LATCF and reserves: Joel Begay, county administrative staff, highlighted a $4.1 million LATCF allocation the county is holding. Begay said the funds — authorized under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and restricted from use for lobbying — may be used to offset a deficit if the board chooses, but they are accounted for as a special‑revenue fund rather than general‑fund reserve.

Votes at a glance:
- Action: Adopt final budgets, including general fund, special revenues and special districts for FY 2025–26
- Motion: Moved by Supervisor Rogers; second: not specified in the hearing record
- Vote: Rogers — yes; Porteous — yes; Womack — yes; McCauley — yes; Chair Gonzales — yes
- Outcome: Approved (5–0)

What’s next: County staff left the public hearings open for the special‑district budgets until the 1 p.m. session concluded and said formal adoption of all budget components follows the hearing process. Staff also indicated they will continue quarterly revenue monitoring, departmental hiring freezes and ongoing outreach to explore additional efficiencies.

Sources: Presentations and remarks by Jay Varney and Joel Begay during the Madera County Board of Supervisors budget hearing on June 9, 2025.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BOS Special Meeting 06/09/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Madera County Board of Supervisors approved a $578,436,287 operating budget for fiscal year 2025–26 on a 5–0 roll call. The plan reduces funded positions, keeps public safety the largest discretionary share and leaves a modest projected operating deficit and a very low year-end reserve unless the county taps LATCF funds.","taxTitle","Madera County, California","taxId",4595,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},7312659,"County officials press City of Madera on animal‑services cost sharing as fee study continues",189,3777540,3966795,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17&start=3777&end=3966","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17/thumbnail_3777540.jpg","/articles/7312659/Madera-County/California/County-officials-press-City-of-Madera-on-animalservices-cost-sharing-as-fee-study-continues","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7312659-13d12c86ac3eaf7462807795e5507f3d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771134729&Signature=PkgN7Q10LZcRpd4sY3xzxVu~tEaRQDKA343EgGGOHQUSLqhbICLPYOG-Qa75QH8Go0cxt-ZF2uZw~IxqU4sW1~0qCoOPPL0mZBOiqohg~4HqSalkvDyTSpOquS3BGBMjY63dNSrQ3hPu2kJlFR6-6845R1N2k2RkYsNtzj1GFaOETWO9W4V4YKeMJJtZpKiMN8T9QJbIwgV1HwvOgA8keOtnPNXJFCo8ye5uI7vjEKh~2YFdWoh9VL1~TQ6LTs3c9UE7TzBB9ptkgUduMwkWYW1G0rqc5t14e67ECaNYiq9IJQ0c4WfrLxhhV9Z~vmKhgYC3yARoTU5YWpWNM-8g5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Madera County supervisors pressed for clearer cost sharing with the City of Madera and Chowchilla during the budget hearing Tuesday, saying county taxpayers currently shoulder a disproportionate share of animal‑services costs.

Amy Toller, director of Madera County Animal Services, told the board the department had to absorb most intake, medical care and euthanasia costs for animals originating in the city of Madera. “We are unfortunately burdened with the cost of their euthanasia, their intake, their medic‑ medical cases,” Toller said, adding that the city pays about $180,000 a year while bringing an estimated 40% of the animals to the county facility.

Supervisors said that disparity is material to the county’s near‑term budget gap. “That $750,000 deficit before we dip into our fund balance — that could be solved right then and there,” Supervisor Rogers said, urging administration to take a “deep dive” into the city’s share.

Fee study and next steps: County staff confirmed a countywide fee study is under way with consultant NBS, aiming to return to the board in fall or winter for adoption. Jamie Becks of Community and Economic Development said the target is to bring the study to the board in fall or winter 2025. Joel Begay added staff will combine concepts from a 2018 animal‑shelter study with the NBS fee work to produce cost‑share options and metrics so the board can consider adjustments or exercise the six‑month termination clause in the county’s intergovernmental agreement with the city if necessary.

How services differ: Toller told supervisors the City of Chowchilla handles most animal services in‑house and only uses county support for some programs (TNR, vouchers), while the City of Madera does not operate a shelter and relies on county intake, raising county costs. Toller said the department is conducting a fee study to quantify the actual per‑animal cost and help structure equitable agreements.

Why it matters: County officials said the results of the fee study will inform whether the county should seek higher payments from cities, renegotiate terms, or — as one supervisor suggested — allow a city to provide its own comprehensive animal control services and cancel the current agreement with six months’ notice.

Sources: Presentation and remarks by Amy Toller, Joel Begay, Jamie Becks and several supervisors during the June 9, 2025 Madera County budget hearing.","Supervisors and county staff flagged growing county costs for animal services, questioned the $180,000 city contribution and urged completion of a fee study to quantify cross‑jurisdictional costs.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},7312656,"Residents and supervisors press county on road impact fee spike and State Route 41 funding plan",439,10081795,10521351,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17&start=10081&end=10521","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17/thumbnail_10081795.jpg","/articles/7312656/Madera-County/California/Residents-and-supervisors-press-county-on-road-impact-fee-spike-and-State-Route-41-funding-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7312656-5d1cef1fe76593853d11cd08bdd7d023/orig.mp4?Expires=1771134729&Signature=OSkiji6FTbFlA3YOusA0jLsdcP9vKyMwAsfcTUhisqAdJccFun--PB8q62qYlL5uv4zdK3Ocm~svvXO1iWAwGbPE4C-JgcHTWmBw~QBKNVABX2E4bWCCouEskvSVVzN9F0QfguSlhDoXx0c44udDdcU~4xAb18NBS-ghjrnB-9GfrZ8wsHkNHP8Z3Tmjshw0dgsQr-ajAj~LkKoPnbAJCWkvFoCowyervTtHV7asTBjAU4TFFxu-LEaZSS2-mII2DZ3dN7DAnTxwhbDwvDhUuXvfA3r9JBW6Bp3ga1FTng2RDgcxl70Nl8bEhglc3EEQK54jhMotjIGGF7IJXTcorA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A public commenter raised detailed questions about the county’s road impact fees and the financing plan for State Route 41 during the June 9 budget hearing, prompting staff to explain current collections and the mechanics of any future transfers.

What was asked: Dan Metz of Sierra Citizens for Sensible Government told the board the proposed budget shows a sharp increase in road impact fee revenue compared with recent years and questioned whether a $5 million transfer and a $55 million carryover relate to funding for SR‑41. Metz also cited county code language about interfund loans and asked whether proposed appropriations complied with statutory limits on use of impact fees.

County reply: Matt Treiber, chief of development services, and Joel Begay explained the apparent jump in the road‑impact fee account. Treiber said the proposed budget reflects actual impact‑fee collections in the current fiscal year totaling about $26.2 million, up from prior estimates of roughly $10 million, largely because of growth tied to development along the SR‑41 corridor. Begay and Treiber emphasized that any reallocation or loan between the county’s road impact‑fee subaccounts (for county/regional projects and the SR‑41 project) would require a formal board action and a loan/repayment agreement in accordance with county ordinance.

Project financing picture: Staff summarized the overall SR‑41 funding picture as including federal allocations, road impact fees and other sources. Begay said the county had accumulated roughly $26.9 million in identified federal funds and, combined with impact‑fee balances and enhanced financing options, the county has about $86 million available for programming though total project costs may approach $150 million. Staff said they remain close to completing preparatory work for the project and will present specific loan documents and financing steps to the board when appropriate.

Why it matters: Changes to impact‑fee projections and any decisions to move funds into a large capital project carry direct consequences for county reserves and the ability to pay for other county road needs. Metz pressed the board for transparency on transfers and legal compliance; staff invited the commenter to follow up with the county office for more detailed records.

Sources: Public comment by Dan Metz and responses by Matt Treiber and Joel Begay during the Madera County Board of Supervisors meeting on June 9, 2025.","A commenter questioned a sharp rise in projected road impact fee revenue and sought clarity on how county road funds and transfers relate to State Route 41 improvements. County staff said higher collections tied to development on the SR‑41 corridor explain the increase and that any transfer into SR‑41 project accounts would be processed as a board‑",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},7312652,"County to unfund 41 vacant positions as public‑safety spending remains primary discretionary priority",901,2016020,2917200,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17&start=2016&end=2917","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3795402-dc27a6c8281c8b95ff0081f856c90e17/thumbnail_2016020.jpg","/articles/7312652/Madera-County/California/County-to-unfund-41-vacant-positions-as-publicsafety-spending-remains-primary-discretionary-priority","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7312652-b3a19d9066e0d2738d8b7d219bfedf9c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771134729&Signature=EEQlCU2bTm4pTz4yULt6JSRZ63OirSS1A9eEWRxw2uemxib-eoQ83t5ESst1HtH~vmQQ-HGZhk6ZTpbE~K1sXc5jUjs9KmIYXWiWGU5VkuufD98YWqYVUIXWoWEX7Ncw9L1vDyBlZuo8QtEXoPW43LYxTrut-JvicWOLf~m0MgJ7iFc5IOnIfsbBvUnkXsCCPbejsZm7N9VMjG53js09L3ExkpcHYME8sLSDCvqHZ3bE-ieBWlJm~tP90W1Qb6Ta6YkGvt-DJjiL-bsIQLZk98EXK9eQlsPj2D1cLselDNkQx6mwtGz2Wu8eUAH1KIizxS2nXddqVtMFVISq4NYVhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Madera County’s recommended 2025–26 budget includes the unfunding of 41 positions and a net decrease of 22.25 funded positions, county administration said during the budget hearing.

Jay Varney, Madera County chief administrative officer, and Joel Begay, County Administrative Office staff, told the board the positions recommended for unfunding are vacant and that no layoffs will be triggered. Begay said the proposed total funded positions are 1,754.75. Officials stressed the board’s long‑standing priority for public safety: roughly 73% of discretionary revenue is allocated to public‑safety functions, a share that decreased by one percentage point from the prior year due in part to position adjustments.

Budget pressures and offsets: Staff said the county reduced departmental net county costs by about $3 million through targeted reductions and that retiree‑health premium increases — driven in part by federal changes — added roughly $1.1 million in cost pressure. County administration projects a $1.2 million operating deficit in the proposed budget and a projected year‑end deficit of about $748,000 using a conservative 1% salary‑savings assumption.

LATCF flexibility: Begay and Varney discussed $4.1 million in LATCF funds (American Rescue Plan Act 2021 related) that the county is holding as a special‑revenue fund; Begay said those funds can be used for a broad set of government purposes except lobbying and could be recommended later to offset deficits. Staff emphasized that LATCF is accounted for separately from the general‑fund reserve and any use to backfill county operations would be an explicit board action.

Why it matters: The unfunding of vacant positions reduces expected payroll obligations without triggering layoffs this year but narrows hiring flexibility if revenues do not grow. Supervisors and staff discussed continuing a targeted hiring freeze, strategic reorganization and possible conversion of some functions to subvented or grant funding.

Sources: Remarks by Jay Varney and Joel Begay during the Madera County Board of Supervisors budget hearing, June 9, 2025.","County administration told the board the FY25‑26 recommendation unfunds 41 vacant positions to reduce net county costs while allocating roughly 73% of discretionary funding to public safety; staff flagged LATCF funds as a flexible source to plug remaining shortfalls.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Madera County adopts $578.4 million 2025–26 budget, leaves small operating shortfall

County officials press City of Madera on animal‑services cost sharing as fee study continues

Residents and supervisors press county on road impact fee spike and State Route 41 funding plan

County to unfund 41 vacant positions as public‑safety spending remains primary discretionary priority