After split vote, Walsh County commission debates next steps on sales tax and county jail; legal opinion allows sales tax use for jail construction

Note: This article summarizes the commission’s extended discussion and next steps after county voters split on two ballot measures earlier this month. It reports the legal guidance presented to the commission and the range of policy options discussed; it does not assert which option the commission will choose.

The commission devoted substantial time on June 3 to discussing the results of a recent local election and the narrow, divided public vote on Walsh County Ordinance 2025‑1 (a sales tax ordinance). County counsel reported that the ordinance language passed by voters can be adopted by the commission and that, if adopted, the sales tax revenue could be used for construction of a jail or sheriff’s office as described in the ordinance language presented to voters. Commissioners emphasized that adopting an implementing ordinance and instructing the tax office to begin collections are separate steps: the county has a six‑month window following the election to adopt an implementing ordinance, and the state tax office requires at least 90 days’ notice before collections can begin.

What was decided and what remains unresolved: the board did not adopt any implementing ordinance at the June 3 meeting. Commissioners asked the Samuels consulting group (the jail/feasibility consultant previously engaged by the county) to continue working with county staff and the commission to identify viable alternatives and lower‑cost options that could be funded in whole or in part by a sales tax. Commissioners discussed multiple options: a smaller jail footprint (fewer beds), renovating/reusing existing county property for custody functions, contracting with neighboring counties for housing detainees, or a combined sheriff/jail facility. Several commissioners stated they would consider a smaller plan that reduces the price tag; others said they would not support using sales tax revenue for a sheriff’s office or an expanded transfer center rather than a detention facility intended to reduce transports.

Why it matters: the county faces operational strains related to inmate housing and transports; the election produced a split mandate. Legal clarification that the sales‑tax ordinance could be implemented gives the commission a procedural option, but commissioners said they want additional feasible, costed options before choosing to adopt an implementing ordinance. Adopting an ordinance and directing the tax office to begin collections would commit the county to a revenue stream that must be used per the ordinance language and state procedures.

Next steps: the commission agreed to continue working with the Samuels consulting group to produce several alternatives (smaller jail, reuse of county facility, and contracting options) and to provide direction to the jail committee on next steps. The county has until mid‑November 2025 (six months from election) to adopt an implementing ordinance if it chooses; if adopted, collection start dates would depend on timely notice to the tax authority.