Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County administrator warns of structural shortfalls in 30-year forecast; budget book due May 8
Summary
County Administrator Gary Schmidt previewed the proposed Clackamas County budget, described a 30-year forecast requirement and structural constraints from limited property-tax growth, and warned that the sheriff's office and other departments may not be fully covered by a 3% departmental increase without additional revenue or cuts elsewhere.
County Administrator Gary Schmidt told the Clackamas County Budget Committee on April 21 that the proposed fiscal-year 2026–27 budget will be distributed to committee members on May 8 and that the committee will convene to consider the proposed budget on May 26.
Schmidt said the budget he will present follows a recent change to county code requiring a 30-year financial forecast that must close with a positive ending balance. To meet that requirement he recommended a conservative approach and proposed a 3% across-the-board increase for departments funded by the general fund; Schmidt cautioned that 3% is insufficient for several departments, most notably the sheriff's office, because personnel and contract costs have risen faster than property-tax growth.
"You will receive the proposed budget that I will present to you for Clackmas County for fiscal year 2627," Schmidt said, and later summarized options the committee will have, including revising forecast assumptions, using one-time revenues, changing services, or delaying reductions.
Commissioners pressed on the sheriff's budget and the interaction with a potential voter-approved millage (levy). Commissioner Savis said, according to figures discussed in the meeting, that if the sheriff's proposed millage rate were in place today it would generate roughly $11.4 million in additional revenue — a claim Schmidt said would be considered alongside the static levy assumptions used to build the proposed budget. Committee members requested historical detail showing how much the general fund has subsidized sheriff-related contracts and levy shortfalls over recent years.
Schmidt said the proposed budget currently assumes the existing levy's revenue level (a conservative, static assumption) but that the committee could change forecast assumptions when it considers the proposal in May. He also noted that some costs (for example, the jail medical contract, fuel, and food services) have increased significantly and that labor contracts negotiated after the levy projection were not included in earlier voter estimates, creating additional pressure.
The presentation framed constrained choices for the committee: increase revenues (for example, by successful levies), reallocate or reduce services, allow more forecast risk, or accept short-term one-time remedies that defer structural fixes to future years. Schmidt said he would provide detailed line-item analysis and options in the proposed budget book. The budget book will be posted online and delivered to members on May 8; the budget committee's next meeting is scheduled for May 26.
Questions and discussion during the preview emphasized that law-enforcement and criminal-justice spending represent a large share of the general-fund picture and that committee members want line-item detail ahead of final deliberations.
