Commissioners keep settlement baseline for sheriff’s FY27 budget but open path for mid‑year amendment

Sheriff Flowers told the county commission during the July 8 budget workshop that the sheriff’s office needs additional appropriations to cover increased health‑insurance costs and asked the board to raise his FY27 allocation beyond a previously signed settlement amount.

Flowers said the additional cost attributable to the healthcare increase (less the portion tied to mental health court) totals about $1.88 million, and he asked the board to split the burden so the sheriff’s FY27 budget rises above the $4,000,000 increase that was part of the settlement. "That's my ask," Flowers said, requesting the board consider a total that would add roughly $570,926 to the agreed increase.

County Attorney counseled the board that the settlement is a binding written agreement and may not be amended except by mutual signed agreement. "This agreement contains the entire and exclusive understanding and may not be amended or modified except by mutual signed agreement of the parties," counsel said on the record.

Commissioners split on whether to amend the settlement now. Several members said they preferred to honor the signed terms and explore options for the sheriff to seek a later budget amendment or use rollover/excess FY26 funds. Commissioner Adams said honoring the settlement provided a clear, defined starting point and opposed an immediate change to the signed terms. Commissioner Fletcher urged exploring where additional dollars could be found without undermining the agreement.

Outcome and next steps: The board did not alter the signed settlement during the workshop. Instead, commissioners reached consensus to allow the sheriff to request a FY27 budget amendment (with documentation) to address the outstanding amount, not to exceed the sum discussed on the record ($580,009.26). Staff and the sheriff’s office were directed to reconcile FY26 balances and, if needed, prepare a formal amendment for a future meeting and vote.

Why it matters: The sheriff’s office is the single largest constitutional claimant in the general fund. Any increase affects the allocation of limited ad valorem revenue and can reduce flexibility for other services or require spending tradeoffs. The county attorney’s advice highlighted the legal formality of settlement terms and why the board preferred a formal written amendment if it chose to change the baseline.