Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Trumbull County commissioners propose deep departmental cuts to close $1.18 million shortfall

3398186 · February 28, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Trumbull County commissioners moved on Feb. 28 to trim department spending after staff said anticipated 2025 general fund revenue is about $64 million, roughly $6 million below 2024 receipts.

Trumbull County commissioners moved on Feb. 28 to trim department spending after staff told them anticipated 2025 general fund revenue is about $64 million, roughly $6 million less than the $70 million in receipts the county saw in 2024.

The commissioners said they must reduce requests that collectively exceeded the certified revenue. Commissioner Malloy, Commissioner Bernard and Commissioner Hernandez pressed department leaders and staff to reduce non‑mandated spending, with staff offering line‑by‑line adjustments and several departments agreeing to smaller starting figures for later review.

Why it matters: County officials said the shortfall is large enough that, unless revenues increase or reserves are reallocated, departments could face furloughs or layoffs late in the fiscal year. Staff emphasized the difference between actual cash received in 2024 and the revenue the budget commission certified for 2025, and repeatedly urged the board to treat the reduced figures as working targets that can be revisited as new revenue data arrives.

Budget staff said the 2024 total receipts included one‑time items and that the budget commission issued a conservative certificate used to set the beginning spending limit. Prosecutor’s office representative Bill Danso explained the commission’s role: “that is the number that I think the budget commission is comfortable certifying at this point,” and described the certification as an informed, conservative estimate based on recent sales‑tax and collections trends.

Commissioners discussed specific reductions. The commissioners’ own budget was discussed repeatedly as an early target (several proposed figures were floated, including $9.75 million and later amounts near $9.02 million). Several large general‑fund departments — the auditor, prosecutor, sheriff and board of elections — were identified by staff as the largest remaining buckets where reductions had the biggest impact on the gap to be closed.

Board staff reminded the commissioners that a permanent budget must be adopted by April 1 and said the board realistically must finalize a version by the week of March 24 to allow departmental line‑level adjustments. Staff recommended quarterly reviews (June 1, Sept. 1 and Dec. 1) to reassess revenues and consider amended certificates.

Commissioners also discussed non‑personnel measures, such as delaying capital projects and creating a separate capital improvement plan to prevent one‑time purchases from obscuring operating needs.

Ending: Commissioners agreed to continue the line‑by‑line process and to expect department heads to return with revised line‑item breakdowns. They set a tight timetable to finalize a budget resolution for agenda placement in late March so a permanent appropriation can be adopted by April 1.