Cowlitz County commissioners review non-departmental spending and debate how to cut $5.4 million for 2027

County staff on Monday walked the Cowlitz County Board of Commissioners through the non-departmental portion of the general fund, laying out transfers to other funds, centralized benefit reserves, insurance and intergovernmental fees as the board discussed how to meet a roughly $5.4 million reduction target for the 2027 budget.

Staff said non-departmental is a catch-all that funds transfers out — including the Expo Center, an elections reserve, capital-improvement projects, the victim-witness fund, past RCO-match transfers to a shooting range and regular contributions to the budget-stabilization fund and certain debt payments. For example, staff cited a transfer to the Expo Center of about $62,500 in 2026 and a planned $125,000 for 2027. They also noted a roughly $1 million balance in the capital-improvement fund that supports building repairs such as roofs and HVAC work.

The staff presentation detailed a centralized benefits reserve for payouts such as vacation and sick leave when employees leave county service, and explained that some unemployment costs can fall to the county under Washington State lookback rules. Staff also listed recurring professional-service fees (including the state auditor), annual insurance and risk-pool allocations (about $1.3 million to $1.55 million on the countyside), motor-pool insurance placeholders and $244,000 in dues and subscriptions that currently sit in non-departmental (the Council of Governments, Washington Clean Air/WASSAC monitoring, chambers and other memberships were singled out).

Commissioners pressed staff for greater clarity about how the county allocates risk-pool premiums across departments. Staff said the current allocation is based on employee hours worked and acknowledged that the general-fund line visible in non-departmental only shows a portion of the total premium increases; most of the changes are reflected across individual department budgets. Staff recommended exploring a wholesale change to spread risk allocations across all departments so budgets are comparable ("apple to apple").

The board also debated two different approaches for finding the 2027 reductions. Commissioner Doll argued for giving departments a single, simple starting number rooted in projected receipts (staff used a working revenue forecast of roughly $69 million) so departments have a clear target to plan from. Staff and other commissioners described a two-step method: an initial, targeted reduction pass (to remove obvious over-budgeted items carried forward year-to-year) followed by a cross-department review to allocate final cuts more surgically. Staff said one-on-one reviews with departments have already produced about $5.3 million in candidate reductions and that a further budget amendment could follow once the board sees totals.

Staff told the board it expects to have department-specific reduction numbers by mid-May and said it may carry a budget amendment at the end of May to reflect those changes. Commissioners repeatedly asked for clearer, department-level impact statements so elected officials and department heads can understand what any target would mean to their operations. Several commissioners urged a firm deadline so staff and departments can prepare for the reductions.

The discussion closed with plans to continue workshops and to present more specific numbers to departments; staff also reminded the board of an upcoming public hearing on rural economic development dollars the next day.

Ending: The board did not take a final vote on any budget action in this session; staff expects to return with department-level reduction targets in mid-May and a possible budget amendment late in the month.