Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Juan County weighs levy lid lift to fill roughly $3 million budget gap
Summary
Council discussed placing a levy lid lift on the ballot to address an estimated $3 million gap for 2027, debated timing (April special vs. later), whether to require an organizational review first, and asked staff to return with cost options and beneficiary lists.
San Juan County Council members and staff spent the bulk of their meeting reviewing options for a levy lid lift after staff said the county faces an estimated $3 million shortfall for 2027.
The discussion opened with staff summarizing past levy lid lifts (2009, 2014, 2019) and describing technical options: single-year permanent lifts (which change the levy amount and then let it grow at the statutory cap) versus multi-year or temporary lifts. "Staff recommend that we do place something on the ballot," the presenter said, noting statutory deadlines that shape feasible election dates.
Why it matters: council members repeatedly emphasized that a levy lid lift would aim to preserve services and avoid more disruptive cuts. Chair Paulson warned that, without additional revenue, "We've gotta get rid of $3,000,000 in services," and urged the council to be explicit about which programs could be eliminated so voters understand the tradeoffs.
Timing and readiness were contested. Staff recommended the April special election so the county could attempt a smaller ask and, if necessary, re-run in November. Some council members strongly opposed April as too soon, saying the county needs more time to demonstrate internal housekeeping and present a coherent case to voters. One member warned, "I will not support, I will not vote in favor of a levy in April," arguing an organizational review should precede a ballot measure.
How large an ask was left open. Staff presented rough revenue math tied to the county’s assessed valuation and noted that re-creating prior mill rates would yield substantially more revenue than smaller incremental increases; staff also said their modeling would show what a proposed penny/mill increase would mean for the average homeowner. Council members asked staff to return with specific homeowner-cost estimates and with scenarios that do not simply recreate past mill rates but consider equity and local economic reality.
Beneficiaries and marketing: staff noted previous levies earmarked funds for senior services, extension services, parks and fair, public health, and a small facilities bucket, and asked whether the council wants a similar beneficiary list. Some councilmembers said marketing should focus on what will be cut if the levy fails rather than only on what would be funded.
Next steps: staff will draft resolution options and return with beneficiary lists, cost-to-homeowner estimates, and sample ballot language. They also proposed public listening sessions (two per ferry-served island) and a staff webinar on allowable information for public employees. Council members asked for additional fiscal detail, comparators from similar jurisdictions, and clarity on what an organizational review would cost and produce.
No formal vote occurred; staff will return with draft options in coming weeks. The council scheduled follow-up discussions and public outreach steps as it weighs whether to place a levy lid lift before voters.
