Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cochise supervisors briefed on state budget risks, probation funding gap and legislative wins
Summary
County Supervisors Association representatives told Cochise County supervisors that while counties avoided direct cuts in the recent state budget, a planned zero funding year for probation officers in FY28 creates a material exposure that could shift costs to counties. CSA also highlighted amendments won, bills defeated, and technical budget fixes that saved counties money.
The Cochise County Board of Supervisors received a briefing from the County Supervisors Association about this year’s state legislative session and the state budget, including a funding gap for probation officers that CSA warned could shift costs to counties.
Craig Sullivan, a representative of the County Supervisors Association, said the legislature produced an $18 billion general fund budget and roughly $45 billion in total funds, and that counties had been closely watching how the state allocated resources. "They funded probation officers at the level we needed in fiscal '27, reduced funding to zero in fiscal '28, and then restored the funding in fiscal '29," Sullivan said, calling the FY28 gap an "exposure point" for counties that may require county budgets to pick up costs if the state does not change course.
Sullivan told the board the association triaged hundreds of bills and was able to amend 18 bills in counties' favor, defeat 34 bills, and secure 13 policy changes. He said CSA testified 49 times in committees and conducted more than 100 direct meetings with legislators. "If we can give lawmakers something that's scannable, with charts and key takeaways, they're able to consume it while they're sitting in a meeting," he said.
Chair (speaker 1) and other supervisors pressed for clarity about what a lapse in state funding for probation officers would mean locally. Sullivan said the probation officers technically are state employees assigned to court functions but are jointly funded; a shortfall at the state level would leave counties with a funding obligation the year funding drops to zero.
Sullivan also flagged technical corrections CSA secured in budget math that produced savings for Cochise County, and he noted the state’s rainy day fund—roughly $1.7 billion—was not tapped in the package. "We had a model error that would have increased county costs; our team caught it and we saved Cochise about $90,000 from the original baseline," he said.
The association urged county staff to use CSA’s online data tools and toolkits to prepare professional staff for implementation of newly effective laws and to monitor ballot measures and on-site tabulation proposals that could create unfunded mandates unless the state provides funds.
The board requested follow-up materials and the CSA promised a summary document of new laws and a county finance officer guide for local staff. The briefing ended with an invitation to the CSA summit in Flagstaff for deeper discussions in October.
