Spokane warns two‑month shortfall in Criminal Justice Assistance Fund as county jail charges outpace revenue

City finance staff told the council that charges allocated by Spokane County for detention services are rising faster than the state criminal justice sales tax revenues that fund the city's Criminal Justice Assistance Fund. Jessica Stratton, a city finance official, described the Criminal Justice Assistance Fund (established 2007 and funded by the state's 0.1 percent criminal justice sales tax) as the primary source used to pay the city's share of county jail bills. Stratton said the fund built a healthy balance over time but was used for other lawful purposes—police Axon equipment, electronic monitoring, interpreter costs and, under the state's 2021 fiscal flexibility authority, more than $6 million in homeless services in 2022–2023. Stratton said county detention charges have outpaced the sales tax revenue and that the city is “currently sitting on 2 months of bills because we do not have cash to pay them.” She estimated that two months of unpaid bills are roughly $1,300,000. The staff presentation showed the city's average daily population (ADP) percentage rose from about 10 percent in 2021 to about 14 percent in 2024 (a roughly 35 percent increase), while the city's allocated jail bill rose by about 78 percent in the same period. City staff explained the county's cost allocation method is driven by participating jurisdictions' share of average daily population and by charge classification: charges classified as county jurisdiction (for example, felony bookings prosecuted by the county) are allocated to the county, while misdemeanor charges prosecuted at the city level are allocated to the city. Staff said that lack of a signed, current contract with the county and disagreement over charge methodology is a key reason there is no clear agreed method for the county to charge the city. Stratton and budget staff said the Criminal Justice Assistance Fund will require an infusion of funding to remain solvent this year and going forward, and that the city budget assumed estimated jail costs based on the county's preliminary allocations but the year‑end true‑up was substantially higher than anticipated. Council members asked clarifying questions about whether resident status matters (staff said it does not; allocation depends on arresting agency and charge type) and whether the city could seek retroactive adjustments when a new contract is negotiated (staff said they would explore legal analysis). Staff flagged this as a near‑term budget vulnerability and an item for negotiation with the county.