Scotts Bluff County commissioners weigh cuts, staffing needs as tax ask nears $15.25 million

Scotts Bluff County commissioners met to continue working through the annual budget and heard staff updates on department reductions, staffing needs and possible contracts that could add revenue.

County staff told the board the county's current property tax asking had been adjusted to about $15.247 million and that, at the time of the meeting, the county was roughly $46,000 short of the amount needed to keep the levy flat with last year. Commissioners and department heads discussed a range of potential cuts and other revenue options, including contracts related to the detention center and the sheriff's office that officials said might bring in additional income.

The discussion opened with county staff reminding department heads that commissioners were aiming to hold the levy flat and asking departments to identify further reductions. "We have so many needs, but limited resources to meet all of them," said Lisa, a county staff member who is coordinating the budget process, noting departments had already submitted changes and that commissioners had met five times in the previous two weeks.

Lisa told the board the tax asking had dropped from earlier figures but more reductions were needed: "As of now, we still have just under $1,115,000 to carve from the budget as to keep our levy flat with last year." She also said a larger reduction would be needed to avoid a required postcard mailing to taxpayers (the "pink postcard") that would be triggered by a higher levy.

Department heads described specific cuts and constraints. County Attorney Dave said he expected to reduce his hiring plan after one candidate withdrew and estimated he could reduce his additional request by roughly $67,000 to $90,000 by cutting an anticipated hire and trimming related benefits and contract labor. "Bottom line is I need a lawyer. I've been doing this understaffed for 4 years, and I can't do it any longer. And I won't," Dave said, adding that he had already removed one contract attorney costing about $36,000.

Officials also described possible new revenue tied to corrections work. A county official (Mark) said the detention center had been approached about a contract that, if finalized, "could bring us somewhere around $300,000" in additional annual income, but that details would need to be discussed in closed session because of negotiation and contracting considerations. The same official said a separate sheriff's-office contract might initially bring "probably $180,000 to $200,000" in revenue on a trial basis before converting to an annual contract.

Public-safety and road budgets were flagged repeatedly as the largest drivers of the county's spending. Commissioners discussed taking proportional percentage reductions from large budgets (sheriff, detention, roads) to produce faster savings than cutting many small line items. Road and bridge projects and specific line items were reviewed, including an estimate of $67,500 for work on Orokin Trail Road and options to delay chip-seal or some capital projects to save several hundred thousand dollars.

County Clerk Kelly and other office heads described staffing pressures. Kelly said her office had lost a long-standing fifth position and asked to restore it; commissioners and staff discussed replacing a departing employee (Charlotte) and whether a part-time hire might be feasible. Lisa and other commissioners emphasized the need for departments to reexamine staffing, job descriptions and whether part-time or shared positions could reduce costs. Kelly noted training needs and that some positions require lengthy onboarding, which complicates short-term part-time substitutions.

Commissioners discussed timing and next steps. Staff said they had advertised a preliminary-levy-setting resolution and scheduled follow-up budget sessions; they also agreed to a 4:30 p.m. meeting the next day and to consult county legal staff on whether a 3:00 p.m. budget meeting would be necessary.

The board took a procedural vote to approve the meeting agenda at the start of the session (see Actions). The board did not adopt final budget or levy decisions at the meeting; several proposed revenue contracts and personnel items were described as contingent on further negotiation or executive-session discussion.

The meeting closed with commissioners saying more cuts and clarifications would be needed to meet the flat-levy goal and with plans to reconvene with additional information.