Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Taxation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Thurston County staff present budget update; commissioners ask for holistic revenue scenarios and defer final decisions
Summary
Budget staff reported lower cumulative state revenues and projected shortfalls in 2026; commissioners asked staff to return with a comprehensive list of revenue options and modeling and postponed decisions on annual vs. biennial budgeting until after summer recess.
Thurston County budget staff presented a third 2025 budget update to the Board of County Commissioners on June 11 and asked for direction on revenue options and the timing of budget development.
Summer Miller, budget and finance manager in the commissioners' office, said April 2025 state collections were 11.7% higher than forecast in that month but that cumulative statewide receipts remain about $34.9 million below prior forecasts. Miller said current projections show a potential negative general-fund balance in 2026 of roughly $2.7 million under a conservative scenario; with the board-approved additions included in staff calculations the estimated 2026 shortfall rises to about $6.7 million. The presentation projected 2027 fund balances under both baseline and amended scenarios.
Miller reviewed current and potential revenue options. Councilmanic (board-authorized) options staff described included an admissions tax, punch-board and pull-tab receipts (up to 10% of collections), a transportation benefit district (TBD) sales tax and a TBD vehicle-license fee. Voter-approved options included a general-fund levy lift (lid lift), a TBD sales tax up to 3% and a TBD vehicle-license fee up to $100; staff noted voter timing, majority thresholds and filing deadlines would factor into any ballot measure.
Commissioners requested a more holistic analysis of revenue options and scenarios showing dollar impacts (for example, how much an incremental percentage point in a sales tax or the revenue per dollar of a levy would generate). Several commissioners said they wanted time to digest materials and follow up; the board did not adopt new revenue measures at the session and directed staff to return with modeled options and a fuller list of revenue sources, including items that may not directly affect the general fund.
Miller also summarized anticipated state impacts: the team expects elimination of certain state-funded supports for the 2025–26 fiscal year (a state legal impact reimbursement program cited by staff at roughly $1.1 million statewide), a roughly $300,000 impact tied to truancy reimbursements (Becca-related) and potential reductions related to court-reimbursement guidance (Blake decision), which staff described as complicated and likely addressed in different ways across agencies. Staff said they will continue to refine department-level impacts and report back.
The board also discussed whether to continue biennial (two-year) budgeting or switch to a one-year cycle. Commissioners expressed differing views but agreed to postpone a final decision until after summer recess so they could review staff materials and the revenue scenarios. Staff recommended a "status quo" approach—avoiding new general-fund staffing additions in pending amendments—until the board gives comprehensive direction on budget structure and revenue choices.
The meeting's only recorded formal motion was earlier in the session to amend the agenda and remove a planned executive session; that motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. No other formal budget votes were taken on June 11; staff will return with modeled revenue scenarios and timeline options for the board's planning session.
