Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington County outlines balanced FY 2026–27 proposal but warns of long‑term structural gap
Summary
County leaders presented a balanced FY 2026–27 proposed budget that relies on one‑time assessed‑value gains, ARPA and gainshare dollars and flagged a persistent structural gap caused by Oregon's constrained property tax system; staff said future local option levies and other revenue options will be needed.
Catherine Harrington, chair of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, opened a town hall explanation of the county’s proposed fiscal 2026–27 budget, emphasizing public outreach as staff and commissioners briefed residents on revenue assumptions, one‑time gains and long‑term risks.
The proposed budget is balanced for FY 26–27 but rests on a mix of temporary revenue and modest expenditure reductions, County Assistant Budget Officer Anne Obert said. “This proposed budget reflects both our pride in public service and the sobering reality that Oregon's constrained property tax system does not align with the pace and scale of today's service expectations,” Obert said, summarizing the central challenge facing county finances.
County leaders told residents the county’s general fund faces a chronic structural gap because Oregon measures that cap property tax growth limit revenue capacity as service demands and costs rise. Chief Financial Officer John Steyer said the county’s year‑to‑year picture was helped by an anomalous 11% countywide increase in assessed value this year — driven by several one‑time factors — but he cautioned the boost is unlikely to repeat. “Those boosts helped this year, but there is some caution as we go forward,” Steyer said, and projected longer‑term assessed‑value growth nearer 3–4.5%.
The county described several revenue and expense elements that shaped the proposal: about $9,000,000 per year in gainshare receipts (a program Steyer said will sunset in 2030), one‑time ARPA funds used to stabilize operations, and the Strategic Investment Program (SIP) effects that temporarily change tax rolls. The presentation listed ARPA funds (transcript: $117,000,000) and explained the county has used those one‑time dollars for both pandemic response and targeted capital and IT projects.
On the expenditure side, staff said they are accounting for rising labor and health care costs, newly ratified bargaining agreements, and system investments. Steyer highlighted the county’s Workday enterprise resource planning implementation — a roughly $19,700,000 project funded by ARPA and gainshare/SIP receipts — and a $10,000,000 proposed capital package for deferred maintenance and facility upgrades, including juvenile services, courthouse storm‑drain replacement and building repairs.
To sustain services, staff described continued reliance on voter‑approved levies in public safety and libraries. Obert warned that local option levies are temporary and must be considered strategically; she noted the enhanced sheriff patrol district levy currently expires 06/30/2028 and the recently approved levies will begin July 1 and expire 06/30/2031.
The county framed next steps: the full budget committee (the Board of County Commissioners) will hold presentations and public hearings later in May (noted May 20 on the agenda, with a placeholder May 22 if needed), and staff asked residents to submit written questions to finance_budget@washingtoncountyor.gov for further answers and FAQ posting.
The town hall closed with officials reiterating that while the FY 26–27 proposal is balanced, long‑term stability will require new revenue strategies, careful spending discipline and continued public engagement.
