Commissioners face $2 million gap for animal care facility as budget projections and opioid‑settlement options collide

At a Davis County Commission work session on April 22 in Suite 306, county staff presented three options to address an estimated $2,000,000 shortfall on a proposed animal care facility: (1) continue the current plan and identify funding for the gap, (2) pause the project, or (3) scale the build to fit the existing budget. County staff said the immediate objective was to have the three commissioners identify how to cover the $2,000,000 so work with the architect and construction firm could continue.

Ashley (staff member) and Lane (facilities staff) summarized project history and procurement: a multi‑city feasibility study and subsequent design work and contracts are already under way, and county staff warned that pausing the project could increase later costs and complicate contracts with the architect and contractors who have been engaged after a multi‑year process. Staff described the current position as “at a crossroads” and said further delay could mean reprocurement and additional fees.

Troy (staff member) — identified during the meeting as the staff member familiar with the statewide opioid settlement — told commissioners the county holds about $6,000,000 in opioid‑settlement funds that have not yet been spent. He cautioned that both a state statute and the settlement agreement constrain allowable uses. Troy said the settlement’s Schedule A lists eight broad categories focused on remediation of opioid use disorder (OUD), including treatment, reentry supports and increased funding for jail‑based treatment, but does not expressly list capital expenditures for buildings. He warned that if the county reports using settlement funds for ineligible uses, any settling defendant could seek documents and pursue an injunction in the Third District Court in Salt Lake County; if a court finds the use improper, the county could be ordered to repay funds and future distributions could be suspended while litigation proceeds.

Troy summarized timing and legal concerns raised during the discussion: the jail’s medical wing expenditures cited by staff predate the settlement receipts (the meeting record notes the medical wing work was last charged in February 2021, while settlement payments to counties began in February 2023 and the settlement’s allowable‑use schedule dates to December 23, 2021). Troy said the county attorney general’s office had indicated Davis County’s legal argument might prevail in court, but the AG’s office was reluctant to issue a written position while the legislature and political stakeholders remained engaged; staff reported ongoing discussions with the AG’s office and the plan administrator.

County budget staff presented five‑year projections that, according to the controller’s summary at the meeting, forecast significant use of fund balance if no revenue changes are implemented. The controller said the county could spend down roughly $5,900,000 in 2025 under current assumptions and presented a sequence of projected year‑end fund balances that decline at pace over the multi‑year forecast. Staff said that without revenue increases or spending reductions, the county is likely to consider a general‑fund tax increase and other major cuts to maintain services.

Commissioners and staff discussed alternatives, including targeted tax increases for specific funds, bonding strategies and whether to proceed now or delay the animal shelter. Several commissioners said pausing could make the project more expensive later and could jeopardize the current project team; others worried about legal and political risk in attempting to apply opioid‑settlement funds to past capital expenses. One commissioner suggested that if the county pursues the settlement‑fund option it could “sweep” the balance to preserve the argument, but counsel and other staff warned that doing so carried the risk of litigation and losing funds if a court or a settling defendant disagreed with the county’s accounting.

No formal vote was taken at the work session. Commissioners directed staff to continue work and schedule follow‑up budget committee and work sessions to make a final decision. Staff noted there is an upcoming department‑head meeting on May 7 and recommended an expedited follow‑up so that the commission could resolve the funding question while contracts are active.