Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prosecutor Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jackson County prosecutor warns proposed cuts could cost five prosecutors and hundreds of cases
Summary
Prosecutor Melissa Johnson told the county budget committee that proposed FY26 reductions of roughly $600,000–$800,000 in salary lines would eliminate funding for about five assistant prosecuting attorneys, jeopardizing prosecution of roughly 300 criminal cases and cutting training funds needed for retention.
Melissa Johnson, Jackson County prosecutor, told the budget committee the office’s FY26 operations cannot sustain the cuts currently recommended in the executive’s budget. "This budget proposal before you would just simply, does not work for our office," Johnson said, explaining that roughly $600,000–$800,000 was removed from salary-savings and other lines and that the reduction could equal "5 assistant prosecuting attorneys" and "300 criminal cases" left without prosecutors.
The prosecutor said her team spent FY25 conservatively — declining to hire and deferring litigation and training — producing savings that were then reduced in the recommended FY26 document. That, she said, created a misleading baseline for the FY26 request: "What we expended in fiscal year 2025 does not accurately reflect our needs because we were very, very conservative with our spending," she told legislators.
The request Johnson submitted to the administration had been essentially flat compared with proposed spending, she said, and departmental priorities were reallocated internally to avoid asking for a larger total. Still, the recommended cuts include salary and training reductions that Johnson said will hinder recruitment and retention: "We would also lose our training funds and that would impact retention." She said continuing legal education and other professional development are key to keeping attorneys in the office.
Legislators pressed administration’s representative, Steve Arvo (county administrator), on how the FY26 draft was developed. Arvo acknowledged an accelerated timeline and communication gaps: in several exchanges he said staff used FY25 expenditure history to construct FY26 baselines and accepted responsibility for not circling back to every department head before submitting the recommended document.
Committee members asked Johnson to package a fund-by-fund breakdown of the prosecutor’s requested restorations and to identify which items could be brought forward as budget amendments to the legislature. Several legislators — including those on the panel who represent districts outside the county’s core city — urged her to detail the specific positions and funds at risk so the legislature could weigh amendments.
Next steps: Johnson and her team agreed to provide a concise packet for legislators showing the office’s specific staffing requests, line-item explanations and the fund sources for each request. County administration said it will compile a comprehensive list of department requests and what made the recommended budget so members can evaluate potential amendments before the December presentation to the full legislature.
