Elkhart County councilors weigh shifting corrections salaries into jail fund

Elkhart County officials discussed transferring certain corrections salaries and other jail-related operating expenses into the county's criminal-justice quarter-percent fund during a budget work session, but said they would seek legal review and preserve a short-term cushion to avoid cash shortfalls.

County Attorney Steve Olson said the 2002 state legislation that created the quarter-percent criminal-justice county adjusted income tax (referred to in the meeting as the "cadet") and a subsequent county ordinance and 2013 amendment broadened the fund's allowable uses. "With that description in our 2013 amendment, we have broader authority to incorporate some employee expenses," Olson said, and he recommended reviewing the statute and county documents before making final moves.

The discussion centered on whether corrections positions (staff who work inside the jail) could be paid from the cadet fund rather than the general fund. Olson characterized patrol officers as unlikely to qualify while saying, "sheriff's corrections officers in the jail, we can do. That would be my anticipation," subject to follow-up legal review. County Administrator Jeff Taylor urged caution about long-term capacity and recommended leaving a cushion: officials noted existing bond payments and the need to protect bond covenants while reassigning operating costs.

Why it matters: the cadet fund currently receives roughly $17 million to $18 million annually, and bond payments tied to the jail are about $10 million; by 2029 bond payments are expected to drop, freeing additional capacity. Officials said the fund has a balance in the range of $25 million. Moving eligible jail operating costs and certain corrections salaries could reduce pressure on the general fund, but councilors stressed limits: any transfer must respect bond requirements and statutory scope.

Discussion details and next steps: participants identified a likely two-step mechanics: (1) make reductions in the current general fund budget this year, then (2) on January 1 come back with an additional appropriation on the jail fund to cover those positions. Taylor and other councilors recommended leaving a reserve ("cushion") in the general fund to cover the initial period before the formal appropriation is in place. Olson agreed to review the statutory language and the county ordinance and return with a legal opinion clarifying which employee categories qualify.

Officials also discussed operational moves proposed by the sheriff (identified in the meeting as Sean Holmes), including moving food-service and fuel lines between funds as part of the broader rebalancing. Participants repeatedly emphasized the need to confirm that transfers would not imperil bond covenants or long-term fund sustainability, noting that the jail fund's revenue stream could change under state-level reforms (referred to in the meeting as "SB 1").

The council made no formal decision during the session; instead members asked staff and legal counsel to draft findings and follow-up steps to present at a future meeting.