Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Space Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Open Space Fund running a management-side deficit; county weighs options including ballot changes and spending priorities
Summary
County staff and the Open Space Commission said the 60/40 acquisition-to-management split for the Open Space Fund is not covering recurring management needs, leaving the county to draw on fund balance for operations and prompting discussion of options including changing the allocation, slowing acquisitions, or pursuing voter action.
Clear Creek County staff told the Board of County Commissioners and the Open Space Commission that the county’s Open Space Fund is experiencing recurring shortfalls on the management (development and maintenance) side. Staff said the current allocation — historically discussed as 60% for acquisitions and 40% for development and maintenance — does not cover recurring operations and that the county has been drawing on fund balance to cover management costs.
Why it matters: The management deficit affects routine upkeep (toilet and trash servicing, trail maintenance) and the county’s ability to match grant requests or fund special projects. Commissioners and Open Space staff flagged the county’s reliance on fund balance in 2024 and planned drawdowns in 2025 as unsustainable without changes to funding, service levels or both.
Details staff provided: Amy and Michael (county staff/BOCC) explained several contributing factors: - Open Space currently covers roughly 50% of trails-crew wages and benefits through the management allocation; staff said that contribution is a major portion of recurring costs. - For several years the county has relied on a reserve created while much of the program was volunteer-run; that reserve is being used down as staff and trail work expanded. - Staff said the county’s 2024 actuals and the 2025 budget show management-side deficits that will require drawing on fund balance absent new revenue or program changes.
Options on the table: Staff and commission members discussed multiple nonexclusive approaches: - Change the mill-allocation split (for example, move more of the mill into the management side) or remove the split entirely; such changes would require a ballot measure and voter approval. - Slow or pause acquisitions so the acquisition pot grows while management obligations are controlled, though commissioners noted pausing acquisitions could prompt questions from voters about taxes collected for an underused fund. - Reduce services or lower program scope if no additional funding is available.
Speakers said better multi-year budgeting and clearer projected needs would strengthen any future ballot campaign. Commissioners and Open Space staff said improved budgeting, a finance subcommittee, and a rolling multi-year plan for planned projects and grant matches could make voter outreach more successful.
No formal decision: The BOCC did not direct a ballot change at the meeting. Staff and Open Space Commission members said they will continue analyzing budgets, prioritize projects and consider timing for any future ballot initiative or other funding requests.
