Solano County adopts $1.65 billion recommended budget, draws reserves to balance

5062016 · June 25, 2025

Loading...

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

The Solano County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the recommended fiscal year 2025–26 budget totaling about $1.65 billion, using one-time reserve draws and relying on steady property-tax growth while warning federal and state funding uncertainty could force later changes.

The Solano County Board of Supervisors on a 5-0 vote adopted the county's fiscal year 2025'26 recommended budget, a package the county said totals about $1.65 billion in governmental funds and relies on one-time draws from reserves to balance near-term capital needs.

County budget staff emphasized that while steady property-tax growth helped stabilize revenue, rising costs for pension and health insurance, increased services-and-supplies expenses and a decline in certain sales-tax streams required using reserves. Emily (county budget staff) told the board, "This budget does rely on draws from reserves to cover some of our most pressing capital needs," and said the recommended draw from the capital renewal reserve is $7.8 million, which would reduce that reserve to about $13 million if approved.

The board packet shows the general fund portion of the recommended budget at about $417 million. Special-revenue funds total roughly $1.17 billion; health-and-social-services and public-safety programs together account for about $831 million. Capital projects in the recommended budget total about $48 million. Budget staff also reported the recommended total allocated positions change is very small year over year and highlighted several limited-term positions that are expiring.

Why it matters: the adopted budget funds core county services including health and social services and public safety, functions staff said are heavily dependent on state and federal funding streams that may change. Emily warned the board that unsettled federal and state budgets could require the county to return in the fall with adjustments.

Details and drivers

Budget staff described multiple cost pressures shaping the document: the compounding effect of prior multi-year memoranda of understanding (MOUs) with county labor groups, rising CalPERS pension costs, higher medical and liability insurance premiums and inflation-driven increases in construction and supplier costs. Staff said property-tax growth has been a stabilizer but that a decrease in the statewide sales-tax source often called "Prop 172" has reduced revenue used for public-safety operations.

Staff noted a roughly 0.03% decrease in total governmental funds versus the prior year's adopted budget when transfers are included. Salaries and benefits were cited as the county's largest expense category; services and supplies have grown about 18% in the past three years, staff said. The presentation also listed recommended non-budgetary actions, including a proposed new technology and communications reserve to plan for large, future technology and radio-interoperability costs.

Reserves and balance strategy

County staff said the recommended budget assumes year-end savings from FY24'25 will materialize and uses one-time carryovers and reserve draws to balance FY25'26. The capital renewal reserve draw of $7.8 million is the largest one-time draw noted; staff said the figure leaves the reserve at a lower level than in recent years. Budget staff also described ongoing discretionary payments toward CalPERS unfunded liability accounts as a strategy that has reduced future pension-cost growth.

Positions and expenditures

Budget materials and staff commentary indicated limited net position changes: staff referenced a net addition in the recommended budget and noted several limited-term positions expiring at the fiscal year'end. The packet and staff comments described a cautious approach to salary assumptions because labor contracts are expiring and future compensation costs were not included in the baseline budget.

Board action and next steps

After public comment and board discussion, Supervisor Mashburn moved to approve the recommended budget; Supervisor Brown seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. County staff said they will monitor federal and state budget developments and return to the board if material changes require revisions.

Votes at a glance

Adopt FY2025'26 recommended budget (recommended document and position resolution): approved 5-0. The board recorded approval as "ordered by a vote of 5 0."