Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Midyear topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mendocino supervisors accept midyear budget report, warn of long-term shortfall
Summary
The Board accepted a midyear Fiscal Year 2025–26 report that shows a near-term $2.8 million non-departmental revenue boost but warns of a structural deficit driven by rising personnel and public-safety costs; the board approved CEO recommendations for one-time funding allocations and asked staff for multi-year projections by department.
The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors on March 10 accepted a midyear Fiscal Year 2025–26 budget report that projected a narrow near-term balance but highlighted a deeper, longer-term structural shortfall.
CEO Darcy Antle told the board the county must “remain focused on austerity measures and process improvements that enhance efficiencies,” saying short-term pressures combine with long-term challenges to require “a deliberate and disciplined reset of county finances.”
Deputy CEO Tony Raikes said the Auditor-Controller’s midyear adjustments include about $2.8 million in additional non‑departmental revenue that largely stems from property-tax timing and interest, and that those dollars helped narrow projected shortfalls at midyear. “We have $2.8 million worth of additional non departmental revenue,” he said. Auditor-Controller Chamise Cubbison cautioned that part of that amount is a one‑time accounting shift and not all of it represents ongoing funds: “The balance sheet adjustments primarily relate to the fair value of investment … and do not result in actual funds available.”
The presentation laid out a $12.164 million closeout figure composed of several items staff flagged as one-time or volatile — including investment fair-value changes, supplemental property tax, interest, and departmental activity savings — and recommended using a portion of prior-year unrestricted funds for a list of one-time allocations including road maintenance, capital improvements and water priorities while preserving reserves.
Supervisors pressed staff on the sustainability of ongoing costs, especially in public safety and jail operations, where salary and benefit pressures are outpacing revenue growth. The board received charts showing a 42% rise in salary-and-benefit costs since 2018 despite an approximately 8.5% reduction in positions over that period and asked staff to return with multi-year projections that apply different inflation and growth assumptions by functional area.
The CEO’s recommended midyear adjustments were approved unanimously after an amendment removing a $119,000 cannabis grant request that had been withdrawn by the department; the board also directed staff to publish an interactive version of the five-year projections and to model alternative inflation and departmental-growth scenarios. Deputy CEO Raikes said the five-year look-ahead currently projects that revenue will not catch up with expense growth until around 2030 under the presentation’s assumptions, and noted a future reduction in debt service in 2030 when certain COPs are retired.
The Auditor-Controller told the board to treat prior‑year closeout sums as one‑time resources; staff reiterated the state audit’s finding that the county’s unrestricted reserve — roughly $14 million at fiscal-year end — is below recommended benchmarks of $25 million–$40 million depending on scope. The board scheduled follow-up budget workshops and asked departments to submit detailed 2026–27 budget requests ahead of the next presentations.
