San Benito supervisors rescind layoffs, dissolve budget management team and set placeholder budget direction
Loading...
Summary
The San Benito County Board of Supervisors on June 9 rescinded earlier potential layoff notices, dissolved a recently formed budget management team and directed staff to prepare a placeholder FY2025‑26 budget while staff and consultants refine a final budget.
The San Benito County Board of Supervisors took several formal steps June 9 that reshape how the county will finish its FY2025‑26 budget process.
Earlier in June the board had already rescinded potential layoff notices that had been circulated; staff reported that action to the board during the June 9 hearing. Board members and staff said that rescinding the notices was intended to give the county time to review consultant findings and refine budget decisions collaboratively with department heads.
During the June 9 session the board voted to dissolve the temporary “budget management team” (a task force formed earlier to dissect the recommended budget and advise the board). That motion passed by roll call: Supervisors Kosmicki, Zenger, Sotelo and Velasquez voted yes; Supervisor Currow recorded an abstention. The board directed that the budget ad hoc process continue in a way that complies with open‑meeting requirements and that staff and department leaders remain engaged in the review.
Later in the meeting the board adopted a motion directing staff to prepare a revised FY2025‑26 budget consistent with board guidance (a “placeholder” approach) by a 3–2 roll call: Supervisors Kosmicki, Zenger and Velasquez voted yes; Supervisors Sotelo and Currow voted no. The board’s direction to staff included the following priorities: add back filled positions the board had previously asked to protect; temporarily unfund or defer identifiable one‑time capital and ARPA projects while keeping roads projects and an essential sheriff communications project in the active construction/program list; identify additional one‑time expenditures that could be paused; and produce a revised draft for board review in follow‑up meetings prior to final adoption.
The board’s actions create a two‑step calendar: (1) finalize and adopt a placeholder spending plan so staff can operate and departments can continue service on July 1; (2) over the summer and early fall staff and the board will produce an amended budget informed by departmental input, a clearer accounting of reserves and the consultant’s recommended long‑range forecast. County staff indicated they would return with a revised draft and more detailed schedules to support the board’s final June/September decisions.
Votes and recorded motions
• Dissolve budget management team — outcome: approved; vote: Kosmicki yes; Zenger yes; Sotelo yes; Currow abstain; Velasquez yes (tally: yes 4; abstain 1). • Direction to prepare FY2025‑26 placeholder/amended budget reflecting board changes — outcome: approved; vote: Kosmicki yes; Zenger yes; Sotelo no; Currow no; Velasquez yes (tally: yes 3; no 2).
Board members who publicly explained their votes said the actions were intended to preserve core public‑safety projects while buying time to work with department heads on structural reductions or revenue options. Several supervisors said they would continue to press for a clearer accounting of reserve categories and for departmental input before any involuntary separations occurred.
