Kittitas County budget staff outline $2.86M structural shortfall for criminal justice and public safety family; commissioners direct 5% reductions

County staff presented the 2026 preliminary budget for the criminal justice and public safety family and told commissioners the county currently faces a paper deficit of roughly $4.92 million and a structural deficit of about $2.86 million.

Zach (county budget staff) summarized the numbers: "our current paper deficit stands at 4,920,000... that leaves our structural deficit at 2.86." He told the board the figures reflect a 5% assumed vacancy savings, recent personnel rate updates and a $360,000 freeze in sheriff's office positions.

Staff outlined three principal tools to close the remaining gap: redirect interest from non‑staffed special revenue funds into the general fund (staff estimated $900,000 to $1 million could be available), implement prorated or targeted cuts across departmental family groups, and enact a new hiring freeze policy. Zach said the interest redirection plan seeks to use non‑operational special revenue fund balances rather than funds used for staff and operations.

Budget staff also reviewed how the CJPS family is funded and structured. The family includes the clerk's office, superior court, juvenile probation, law library, lower district court, coroner, the criminal side of the prosecutor's office, upper district court, behavioral health court, misdemeanor probation and public defense. Special revenue funds tied to this family include the one‑tenth mental health (community service) fund, the three‑tenths criminal justice fund, 911/KITCOM pass‑throughs and the prosecutor's victim witness fund.

Prosecutor's office representatives warned that the victim witness fund has experienced steep revenue declines and cannot support current expenses without intervention. The prosecutor said: "we actually statewide needed about 8,000,000 and they backfill 4,000,000... they did not really backfill that portion of it. Our federal dollars, are also, have been declining, and our state match... is stagnant and unlikely to change." The office described possible temporary use of three‑tenths funds to maintain a six‑ to twelve‑month operating buffer while continuing to press the state legislature for a permanent fix.

Staff reviewed department‑level details (personnel and operating cost growth, pro forma comparisons and fund health) for each CJPS office. Several departments cited personnel cost growth primarily from wage adjustments and drifting to full‑roster pro forma budgets (which reflect 100% staffing rather than vacancy savings). Courts noted a transition to the Enterprise Justice (EJ) system in May 2026, which staff said made overtime and equipment estimates uncertain.

The prosecutor and county staff described an interlocal contract under negotiation with the city that would fund one prosecutor position 100% by the city and a second position on an 80/20 split (city/county). Staff said both the county board and the city council would have to approve any contract and that the hires would be contingent on those approvals.

On personnel requests, staff said the requests listed in the packet are not included in the front‑page deficit; adding approved personnel requests would increase the shortfall. Several personnel items include external funding components; staff said some recently negotiated contracts may increase the proportion of city funding for specific positions to 100%.

After discussion, commissioners directed staff to: (1) move projected interest earnings from non‑staffed special revenue funds into the general fund on the headline budget slide so commissioners can see the potential impact on the structural deficit, and (2) task the CJPS family to identify 5% reductions across their total expense budgets (the board clarified that the 5% target applies to expense budgets and does not count additional revenue the departments may identify). Staff said the interest and further details will be on the Thursday study session agenda.

What was not decided: personnel requests will be revisited; the county and city contract for prosecutor positions remains under negotiation and requires formal approval from both governing bodies; staff did not provide an adopted list of 5% reductions at this meeting.

Next steps: staff will return with refined numbers and options at the scheduled study session Thursday, and departments will be asked to model the 5% reductions for the CJPS family.