Clark County officials weigh jail expansion and a mix of taxes as funding options

Clark County Council and county staff spent the bulk of the April 16 meeting reviewing models for jail expansion, staffing needs and how to pay for them, while stressing that no formal decision was made and further work will continue.

County Manager Kathleen Otto told the council the county faces a structural general-fund gap and laid out a multi-part plan that pairs an operating-cost model with possible revenue levers. "We currently have a structural deficit in the general fund," Otto said, adding the forecasted shortfall is "between 11 and 17 million ongoing." Mark Gassaway, a county staff presenter, walked council through a spreadsheet that phases in additional deputies and the court impacts and shows operating costs for a full jail buildout.

The models separated three pieces: the county's existing operating deficit and court staffing gaps; the incremental costs if Clark County Sheriff's Office (CCSO) added deputies; and the impact on courts and detention if the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) added officers. Gassaway cautioned, "I can guarantee you that these are not actual numbers. These are assumed numbers based on the best information that we have today." He also presented a standalone estimate for the operating cost of a completed jail buildout, phased over construction and staffing timelines.

Why it matters: councilors and staff said jail capital and staffing affect many parts of the county budget and services. Otto noted law-and-justice services make up more than 70% of the general fund and pointed to both capital needs (the existing jail dates to the 1980s) and recurring staffing costs, including the need to hire and train staff in advance of new facility openings.

Revenue options discussed included: - A public-safety sales tax, with an option to negotiate distribution with cities so cities and county can share capital and operating responsibilities; county staff said an agreement with the City of Vancouver could lower per-resident costs and might allow some capital to be supported without a supermajority bond. Council staff estimated a 0.2 percentage-point public-safety tax would generate meaningful revenue for capital if implemented countywide. - A juvenile detention and jail sales tax, which Gassaway's model showed would yield roughly $14.5 million in 2026 rising to about $19 million by 2033 under the assumptions used. - A criminal-justice sales tax under consideration in the legislature; county staff said its ultimate distribution could change and would require updating the model if the law differs from current drafts. - Property-tax options including raising the local allowable levy increase beyond the current 1% annual increase (staff discussed the possibility of a 3% annual lift as a councilmatic option). County staff said the 1% yields roughly $780,000 this year and that not taking the increase over multiple years cost the county several million dollars in forgone revenue. - A levy-lid lift (property tax increase) in some example scenarios, and the technical capacity to raise county levies (staff said the county's levy rate was about $0.75 per $1,000 of assessed value with statutory caps cited). - A communications (CRESSA) sales tax to fund emergency communications and offset agency user fees; Dave Fuller, director of CRESSA, told council a countywide communications sales tax (up to two-tenths of a percent) could replace about $7.5 million in existing user-fee and local contributions and provide funding for radios, the CAD and facility needs. Fuller said the county's annual share is about $2.5 million of the current user-fee burden, with about $4 million for the city and the rest for other agencies.

Council and staff discussed timing and strategy for any ballot measures. Otto recommended caution about an August ballot and said November would likely allow more time for coordinated outreach and polling; "I would not recommend going out in August," she said, noting outreach and community education are key to passage. Staff explained the lag between a November vote and first sales-tax receipts (roughly a multi-month lag for Department of Revenue notice and remittance).

Councilors pressed for more detail about taxpayer impacts across income bands and rental households. Councilor Young asked for analysis by income band; staff agreed to add per-household and per-resident impact estimates to future briefings. Sarah, the county's chief deputy treasurer, noted consultant Duncan's backup materials already include sample taxpayer-impact estimates for specific sales-tax scenarios (for example, a two-tenths public-safety tax was described in rough terms by staff during the meeting).

CRESSA and court impacts were emphasized as items staff missed in early drafts. Otto acknowledged CRESSA's costs were inadvertently omitted from the first model and said staff would fold dispatch impacts into future work. Fuller said the communications sales-tax option could pay both capital and operations and would require a county council placement on the ballot.

Public comment before and during the item reflected community frustration about law enforcement and prosecution. Several residents urged stronger prosecution of repeat offenders and faster response from the prosecutor's office; Bruce Barnes and Deborah Taylor described alleged cases of serial fraud and difficulty obtaining action from prosecutors. Kimberly Goheen Elvin criticized what she described as lack of responsiveness in the law-and-justice system and urged better-funded public defense and prosecution alike. Another public speaker urged the council to reconsider an earlier extension request tied to a planning study; Theresa Hardy read a list of organizations opposing an extension of a study tied to the comprehensive plan.

Council action at the meeting: the council approved the minutes from April 9 (motion moved and seconded; "Aye" votes were recorded and the chair said "Motion carries"). No other formal funding or ballot-direction votes were taken; staff explicitly said they were not presenting a single recommendation and would bring additional detail back in subsequent meetings.

Next steps: staff said they will refine models, add per-household impact figures and continue coordination with the City of Vancouver and other jurisdictions. Otto said the item will likely return to the council next week and be discussed through the end of the legislative session to account for pending state action that could affect revenue options. Councilors and staff also discussed polling and outreach plans, and the need to craft an intentional public-education campaign ahead of any ballot measure.

Ending note: while the county outlined candidate revenue streams and a multi-year staffing and capital model for a jail expansion, the council made no final choices at the April 16 meeting; work sessions and more detailed financial analysis are planned before any proposition or levy would be placed before voters.