Human services and public health staff told the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners during a work session that the federal budget bill HR1 introduced a staggered set of SNAP and Medicaid changes that will increase administrative workload, expose the state and counties to benefit cost‑sharing tied to SNAP payment error rates, and could add millions to Jefferson Countys annual costs.

"Implementation for Snap then would start in October '25, and then it would proceed continuously from October '25 all the way to, 2029 and ongoing," Mary Berg, Human Services director, told the commissioners while reviewing the timeline staff had assembled from state guidance.

Why it matters: HR1 reinstates or expands work requirements for SNAP and sets new Medicaid rules for the Medicaid "expansion" population. Those program changes have different start dates and data‑measurement windows; counties must prepare both for front‑line casework and for financial exposure tied to SNAP payment error rates that will begin to be measured in October 2025 and could trigger a state share of benefit costs starting in October 2027.

Caseload and staffing estimates

County staff provided local estimates for the groups most likely to be affected. "We are estimating at this time that in Jefferson County, our expanded population is a little over 33,000 people right now," said Jessie Antonucci, community assistance director, describing the Medicaid population created by the Affordable Care Act expansion that will be subject to some HR1 provisions.

County eligibility and casework impacts depend heavily on whether most of those cases can be renewed automatically via ex parte processes that use existing data interfaces. Staff gave two workload scenarios:

- A modest scenario in which ex parte renewals function for many cases would still create about 200 additional monthly renewals; staff estimated they would need about five additional eligibility specialists at an annual cost of roughly $375,000.

- A conservative or worst‑case scenario in which ex parte is unavailable for the newly subject population could require up to 77 new eligibility specialists at an estimated $5.78 million annually, the presentation said.

SNAP work requirements and payment error exposure

Staff said SNAP work‑requirement changes would substantially expand the number of recipients subject to work requirements. "Our current ABOD population or those folks that are subject to those work requirements is a little over 3,100 people. This would bring us to about 6,600 of our community members that will be subject to work requirements through HR1," an official said during the presentation.

The county also highlighted its exposure to SNAP payment error rates. Colorados payment error rate for federal fiscal 2024 was reported at roughly 9.97%; Jefferson Countys measured payment error rate was 8.93% for that year. Staff warned that federal rules will require Colorado to pay a share of SNAP benefit dollars tied to statewide payment errors beginning in October 2027 if the states error rate remains above the federal threshold.

"Starting in October 2027, Colorado is gonna be required to pay a portion of those SNAP benefits based on our payment error rate, at 9.9% for the last fiscal year," Jessie explained when summarizing the state data.

Staff noted error causes split into county‑caused errors, customer‑caused errors, and state‑system (CBMS) errors; only county‑caused errors are readily addressable with training and process improvements. County staff outlined ongoing quality‑assurance steps aimed at lowering county‑level error rates, including enhanced case reviews, targeted training, and use of internal QA tools.

Estimated fiscal impact and potential offsets

County financial staff presented a preliminary fiscal picture. "If you add up the SNAP costs and the Medicaid costs, we're potentially looking at an added cost of about $17,000,000 a year," a county presenter said, summarizing the staffs working estimates. That figure included a roughly $9.25 million SNAP benefit cost share scenario (assuming a 10% payment error rate) and about $5.78 million in administrative staffing costs under a higher workload case.

Staff outlined one‑time and limited funding sources the county could consider to soften early fiscal impacts: roughly $1.4 million in ARPA interest revenue and about $3.6 million in unallocated ARPA project fund dollars (about $5.0 million total), plus a social services fund balance in the range of $12 million. Staff emphasized those are one‑time sources and do not solve ongoing cost exposure.

Options and next steps

County staff presented a menu of potential but politically and technically complex options for the board to consider, including one‑time allocations from ARPA or fund balances, reallocation of mill levy or previously committed funds, service reductions, or ballot measures. They flagged legal and operational constraints on outsourcing core eligibility work and stressed that quality management and state coordination will be critical.

Staff also described an immediate slate of coordination and response steps: participation in statewide work groups (including a biweekly CDHS work group aimed at lowering payment error rates), preparation of county communication materials for affected residents and employees, local partnership convenings with nonprofit and provider networks, and a public engagement plan that includes a county‑partnered town hall on SNAP and Medicaid changes planned for Sept. 5 in Conifer with Representative (unnamed) Story.

"Our target with these surveys is really to outreach to government, business, nonprofits, education, institutions, utilities, and emergency services that make up a gamut of our community sort of business sectors," said Chris (senior grants analyst) describing a planned partner survey to quantify community impacts and inform county strategy.

Staff asked the board for guidance on whether to pursue deeper one‑time funding options for the 2026 budget, and said they will return with more refined estimates as state guidance and federal regulations become clearer.

Speakers quoted or cited in this article are those identified in the speaker list below and were drawn from the county work session transcript.