Custer County sheriff seeks 12% boost for 2026 budget; proposes military-surplus sales, grants and fees to cover costs

The Custer County sheriff presented a $2.1 million budget request for 2026 on Monday and asked commissioners to consider offsetting a projected county subsidy with revenue from military-surplus sales, new and existing grants, and fee increases.

The sheriff said the office’s 2026 request is about 12% higher than the 2025 budget — roughly $257,000 — driven largely by rising costs for communications, software, data services and capital needs. “We conservatively put $65,000 for revenue [from military surplus],” the sheriff said, adding that the county might realize more if higher-value items sell at advertised prices.

Why it matters: Commissioners heard that rising contract and technology costs (notably a larger recurring cost for the records/dispatch vendor Tyler) and health-insurance increases are pressing the sheriff’s office budget. County staff presented an accounting that projects about $438,000 in department revenue against roughly $2,180,000 in expenses, which would require about $1,818,000 from the general fund to balance the sheriff’s office alone.

The sheriff described three near-term revenue strategies. First, the office has accumulated excess equipment via the Defense Logistics Agency (formerly DRMO) program — including a road grader, a telehandler, a Humvee and a mine-resistant vehicle on loan — that the sheriff said could be sold or placed into county service. He said the county may begin settling those transfers and selling items beginning Oct. 1, and that an internal conservative estimate placed revenue at about $65,000; a less conservative audit suggested totals in the mid five figures higher.

“I think the military surplus is my top opportunity, and writing grants is my second best,” the sheriff said, noting he will ask the county to accept sale proceeds and roll them into the sheriff’s fund via a year-end budget resolution. He also recommended using national auction platforms (examples cited: Purple Wave and other larger auction houses) rather than local classifieds to maximize competitive bids.

Second, the sheriff said he will expand active grant-seeking, including federal wildfire mitigation grants (one figure cited in discussion was a multi‑million-dollar program made available to counties) and a three-year law-enforcement salary grant the sheriff described as roughly $300,000 over three years. He proposed hiring or designating a single county grant manager to avoid duplicate or competing applications and to improve capture rates.

Third, the office is considering modest fee increases (examples discussed: dog-impound fees and expanded civil citation/ticketing options, and landfill fee adjustments for nonresidents) and better enforcement revenue for towns that adopt parking/ticket hardware. Commissioners discussed selectively raising fees or adjusting landfill rates to recover costs for services used disproportionately by nonresidents.

On personnel and pay, the sheriff stressed recruitment and retention concerns. He presented a regional salary survey showing an average starting wage of about $26.06 per hour, a five‑year average around $33, and a current county-wide average of approximately $29.72. The sheriff said the department is not competitive with neighboring agencies on total compensation and retirement benefits.

The sheriff described steps already taken to control overtime through a new shift schedule that builds expected overtime into base schedules; overtime spending reportedly fell from a built‑in historical amount near $100,000 to single‑digit thousands in the current year (past annual overtime figures referenced: 2022 $26,000; 2023 $36,000; 2024 $20,000; current year about $7,000–$9,000). He asked commissioners to consider targeted pay increases rather than blanket raises if available revenue can be found.

Technology and dispatch issues were a second major cost driver. The sheriff described an unavoidable recurring cost from Tyler (records/dispatch/records management vendor) and an unresolved integration problem between Tyler and the department’s older Omnigo records system. The sheriff said some Tyler modules were deferred to reduce the initial upgrade cost but that a recurring subscription/capacity cost remains. He also discussed options for 911/dispatch: stay in the regional E-911 authority, use a state patrol/Pueblo dispatch center for overnight coverage, or create a locally funded dispatch authority financed by a new mill levy; each option has trade-offs in cost, local control and staffing.

Body-camera and evidence storage costs were raised as another recurring expense. The sheriff said the current vendor (Axon/evidence.com) charges cloud storage fees that the county pays; moving storage in‑house and switching vendors would require up‑front hardware and software investment (the sheriff quoted annual cloud-storage costs in the low‑to‑mid $30,000 range and one‑time transition costs for new camera hardware) and changes to how evidence is shared with prosecutors.

Commissioners and staff also discussed other revenue and expense items: a modest but steady posse donation balance (about $40,000) used for vests and ammunition; the canine program, where retaining an existing dog and handler saved roughly $9,000 vs. replacing them; and vehicle-fleet plans that will shift most vehicles to V6 engines to reduce fuel costs over time.

No formal decisions or votes were taken at the meeting. The board asked the sheriff to provide a refined bottom-line proposal for the next round of budget meetings and to return with firm figures, including a clearer projection of proceeds from surplus sales, a scope and probable capture rate for grant applications, and options for targeted salary adjustments.

The commissioners and sheriff noted schedule constraints: a draft budget must be worked on now and the county will finalize certification by the statutory deadlines discussed at the meeting (staff cited an internal schedule calling for a January budget draft to be published by Aug. 15 and final adoption by Dec. 15, with the possibility of midyear amendments). The sheriff said he will begin selling surplus items now and will track proceeds to propose a budget resolution at year end to appropriate any revenue to pay immediate operating needs.

What’s next: The board set a follow-up discussion on wages and countywide budgeting for the next meeting cycle. The sheriff said he will continue to pursue DLA surplus disposals, consolidate grant activity through a single manager if possible, and return with a revised, line‑item budget that shows where new revenue could be applied to pay and critical software and equipment needs.