Mariposa supervisors direct staff to develop sales-tax plan for new sheriff's headquarters after $47M estimate

The Mariposa County Board of Supervisors on April 1 directed county staff to prepare a plan for a sales-tax ballot initiative and to explore a possible increase to the county's transient-occupancy tax to help pay for a proposed consolidated sheriff's headquarters.

The board heard a multi-part presentation from Banner Construction Management and Vanner (financial consultant) describing a facility needs assessment, site options and financing scenarios for a new headquarters intended to bring sheriff's operations, corrections, courts security and the county emergency operations center under one roof. Rob Nash (Banner) described two site options; the board previously selected a lower-cost, lower-risk option (V1).

Scott Murphy (Vanner) presented financing options and a current cost estimate of roughly $47,000,000 for the combined project: Building A (operations) estimated at $27,500,000 plus about $9,500,000 in soft costs, and Building B (evidence storage and training) estimated at $7,500,000 plus $2,600,000 in soft costs. Murphy said the firm examined USDA rural loan programs, local bond or sales-tax measures, state and federal legislative funding requests, conventional bank loans and developer-financing proposals.

County Administrative Officer Joe Lynch told the board the county's Measure M generates about $3.9 million per year and that a half-percent sales-tax previously supplied roughly $2,097,000 annually; he also estimated a sales-tax rollback to the prior rate would reduce tourist burden compared with a property-tax increase. Lynch said the county identified combinations of funding that could cover the annual debt service but emphasized public approval and careful structuring would be required.

Sheriff Jeremy told the board the county's public-safety needs and visitor load justify a consolidated facility: "Let's transform the Sheriff's Office," he said, arguing that modern, collocated facilities would improve efficiency and officer safety.

After questions from supervisors and public comment, the board gave staff direction to return with detailed, number-driven options and community outreach plans for a sales-tax initiative and to study transient-occupancy-tax adjustments as a complementary source. The clerk recorded direction for staff to bring back specific payment and revenue scenarios for board review before any placement on a ballot. The board did not adopt any financing measure at the meeting.

What happens next: staff will prepare a detailed analysis showing how different revenue mixes (sales tax, TOT, Measure M allocation, USDA or state/federal grants) would cover projected repayments and operating impacts, and will return to the board with draft ballot language and community engagement plans for further direction.