Elbert County sheriff requests about $1.08 million in unfunded personnel and equipment; commissioners schedule follow-up

The Elbert County sheriff asked the Board of Commissioners on May 7 to consider $1,075,103.25 in unfunded budget requests for personnel and equipment, saying the office is struggling to keep up with records requests, rising calls for service and safety needs.

County Manager Sean told commissioners the sheriff’s request totals $1,075,103.25 and that the listed annual cost is $963,446.95. He said the immediate budget impact for the remainder of 2025 would be roughly $607,000. “The total annual costs for these requests would be a total of $1,075,103.25,” Sean said. He later noted the $963,446.95 figure as the recurring annual cost and the smaller figure as the short‑term impact in the current year.

The sheriff identified a new records position as his top priority. “Priority 1 would be our records position,” the sheriff said, citing a sharp increase in body‑camera video requests. He said the office processed more than 24,000 requests in 2024 and, with current trends, expects to “be over 39,000 requests for body camera videos by the end of this year.” He said one full‑time staffer could not keep up and that courts have dismissed a “handful” of cases so far this year because video could not be produced in time.

The sheriff and commissioners discussed fees for producing videos and redaction work. The sheriff said the office charges about $37 an hour for processing requests while neighboring jurisdictions charge in the mid‑$40s, and that current fees do not cover staff time. Commissioners and the sheriff also referred to a state statutory deadline of about 10 days for producing certain videos and said the county is checking whether the office must provide the first hour free.

Other personnel requests include converting a part‑time victim advocate to full time and adding investigators. The sheriff said the victim advocate’s salary is largely reimbursed by two grants he named — the “Veil” grant (reported as $10,000 toward the position) and a JAG grant that could reimburse up to $35,000 — but benefits would not be covered and JAG is not guaranteed year to year. On investigators, the sheriff said detectives routinely carry 25–30 felony cases and some investigators handle multiple child‑assault cases that require forensic interviews and lengthy digital forensics work.

The sheriff asked the county to consider paying part‑time workers who currently process concealed‑handgun permits because pending state law changes are expected to greatly increase demand. He said four volunteers currently staff the CCW office three days a week but that “they’re not gonna be able to keep up” if permit processing expands; he cited El Paso County as having hired seven FTEs to handle its workload.

The sheriff proposed a dual code‑enforcement/animal‑control position, saying the county receives 600–700 animal calls a year and that the humane society’s investigative unit has lost funding, shifting cases to the sheriff’s office. He said contracting with an outside animal‑control provider was explored but the vendor had not responded.

Equipment requests included a breaching device the sheriff called a “wall banger” (an 8–10 foot pole device for forcing doors), additional SWAT gear and protective tactical vests with a five‑year shelf life, two precision rifles for SWAT, and subscription services (Lexipol). The sheriff said the wall‑banger and related tools would improve officer safety and allow the team to place drones or robots into buildings before sending officers inside.

Vehicles were also a major topic. The sheriff said nine vehicles were approved for 2025 but that earlier orders from 2023 still had not been delivered, leaving multiple pending vehicle orders. County staff said a typical vehicle price is about $55,000 and upfitting about $24,000, and that leases with the county’s vendor (Unified) are structured with a five‑year term and an optional buyout at year three.

County staff and commissioners discussed possible ways to proceed. Commissioners asked staff to review fund balances and projections; county staff said the audit due in June will give a clearer picture of unrestricted fund balance and how much unbudgeted appropriation is feasible. Commissioners suggested putting personnel and equipment requests on the May 14 agenda and discussed the option of authorizing a capped amount for immediate safety purchases so the sheriff could obtain high‑priority items promptly. No formal appropriation vote was taken.

Next steps include putting two separate agenda items — personnel considerations and equipment considerations — on the May 14 meeting for further board action and reviewing updated budget projections during the 2026 budget process. County staff said any long‑term recurring costs would be revisited during next year’s budget discussions.

The sheriff emphasized officer safety: “We’ve had 3 officer involved shootings since I’ve been sheriff. 2 of them within the last 7 months,” he said, urging the board to consider moving safety items forward quickly.

Fiscal figures cited in the meeting: total requested $1,075,103.25; recurring annual cost listed as $963,446.95; approximate 2025 remaining‑year impact cited around $607,000. The sheriff’s office and county staff said some one‑time costs already budgeted in 2024 were received in 2025, and some requested items may be reimbursable by grants if awarded.