Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CAO: county faces roughly $3 million general‑fund shortfall next fiscal year; board sets status‑quo budget direction
Summary
The County Administrative Officer told the Board of Supervisors on March 11 that the county faces an estimated $3 million general‑fund shortfall for FY 2025–26 driven mainly by GASB 87 allocation changes, rising PERS liabilities and higher insurance premiums.
County Administrative Office staff presented the midyear fiscal review on March 11 and told the board the county faces an estimated $3 million general‑fund shortfall for FY 2025–26. The CAO attributed most of the gap to three primary factors: (1) accounting reallocations and cost shifts related to GASB 87 cost allocations (affecting internal chargebacks and the general fund), (2) higher annual PERS unfunded liability payments and (3) rising county insurance costs (liability and workers’ compensation).
Key numbers staff presented: - Projected carryforward (unspent) general‑fund balance into FY 25–26: about $2.25 million. - Estimated general‑fund deficit for FY 25–26 (status‑quo budget): roughly $3.0 million. - PERS unfunded liability (all funds): the county’s share of actuarial payments totals several million dollars annually; staff cited an $8.3 million figure for the county’s aggregated unfunded obligation across funds and a planned year‑over‑year increase included in the request. - Insurance and risk pool increases: roughly $1.16 million in higher insurance premiums budgeted for the general fund.
CAO recommended and the board directed that departments prepare a status‑quo budget (no new positions), review vacancies carefully and look for non‑mandatory reductions. The board asked staff to avoid immediate cuts to mandatory public safety services and to avoid using general reserves or layoffs if other options are available. Staff listed potential actions to close the gap, including targeted cuts to discretionary contracts and grants (for example community economic development and tourism support), temporary use of teeter or similar one‑time funds, and continued vacancy reviews.
Board members asked staff to return with a menu of options and identified a possible budget committee to review departmental detail with the CAO in advance of the May budget workshop. The CAO outlined a calendar leading to the May 8 budget workshop and a proposed June 10 budget adoption, with a final September adoption after carryforward is finalized.
The board did not adopt reductions at the meeting but approved the direction to staff to prepare the status‑quo budgets with no new positions and prioritized staff options for closing the projected gap.
