La Paz County officials weigh using $6 million in projected solar lease revenue to shore up budget

La Paz County supervisors on Thursday reviewed the county administrator's recommended fiscal year 2026–27 budget and a five‑year forecast that shows a structural shortfall unless new revenues are secured or expenses are cut.

County administrator (presenting the recommendation) said, “Revenues are projected at 23,500,000 and does not include solar lease revenue,” and urged the board to consider the county's conservative fiscal forecast, which assumes a 6% operating cost growth rate. The staff recommendation targets operating expenditures of roughly $22.5 million to “live within our means.”

The county's financial consultant, Karen Zickler, told the board staff analyzed scenarios that include centrally assessed solar property tax and separately modeled solar lease proceeds. Zickler said DL's analysis projects annual solar lease payments of about $6,000,000 per year through 2030–31, but she warned the board not to assume those proceeds for ongoing expenses until there is a pattern of actual receipts.

“Estimated solar lease revenue is $6,000,000,” Zickler said during her presentation and showed a scenario in which folding the full amount into recurring general fund revenue would produce a much stronger long‑term fund balance—but would also expose the county if the payments do not materialize as projected.

Board members debated options for how to use solar money if it arrives. Staff outlined conservative approaches such as dedicating a modest percentage (for example, 15%) to general operating support for near‑term inflationary pressures or one‑time capital, funding a project accountant or additional assessor staff to expand the tax base, or phasing pension (PSPRS) buy‑downs over multiple years. Staff recommended holding larger commitments until cash is received and a revenue history is established.

Supervisors also discussed timing and cashflow: staff noted some solar and centrally assessed tax receipts are recorded in the county midyear, and DL told the county those annual lease payments are typically due once a year in December. That timing, staff said, would make funds available about halfway through the fiscal year and supports midyear decisions rather than full‑year commitments before receipts post to the county's solar cash balance.

Cheryl Stone, finance director, walked the board through the county administrator's specific recommended staffing and capital changes. The recommendation includes incremental position additions for the assessor's office (one appraiser and one property assistant in the administrator's proposal, versus a larger department request), a civil deputy attorney, and a project accounting position funded in part from solar transfers; several larger capital requests were deferred.

Staff also highlighted that grants and special‑revenue accounts add roughly $15.8 million ($16.3 million including the jail district) in activity outside the general fund and that enterprise funds (parks, golf, public works) were recommended at department request levels with no administrator changes.

The board did not take any final votes Thursday. Staff said they will return with revised scenarios and more detailed enterprise‑fund slides at a follow‑up work session next week, and recommended that the board not count on the full $6 million annually for recurring costs until the county has a track record of receiving the payments.

The work session was adjourned with the board expecting another session next week to provide direction before tentative budget adoption.