Final county budget required months of negotiation and Sheriff’s Office revisions

Brandon Leuallen, The Business Times

The Mesa County Commission unanimously adopted the 2026 budget on Dec. 9, approving a $242.9 million spending plan after months of internal debate, revenue forecasting and revisions to departmental requests, including extensive discussions with the Sheriff’s Office.

County leaders emphasized the adopted budget does not eliminate filled positions and does not cut currently staffed operations. The commissioners also said departments may request additional funding during the year if unforeseen needs arise.

“If something comes up next year that a department truly needs, they can come back to us. There is a process for supplemental requests, and we have always been willing to look at those when they are justified,” Mesa County Commissioner Bobbie Daniel said.

According to the FY 2026 Adopted Budget: Revenues, Expenditures and Fund Balance, Mesa County’s total budget represents a 2.8 percent decrease from 2025, driven largely by lower intergovernmental revenues. After removing interfund transfers and internal charges, the net county operating budget revenue totals $211 million, which is essentially flat compared to last year and not keeping pace with rising costs.

County Administrator Todd Hollenbeck opened the hearing by acknowledging how departments managed the hiring freeze while maintaining service levels.

“During the hiring freeze, departments stepped up and maintained essential services despite current vacancies, which is really demonstrative of the very best of Team Mesa,” Hollenbeck said.

He added that early revenue forecasting allowed the county to reduce expenditures where necessary, prioritize core services and public safety and present a balanced budget for 2026.

Sheriff’s Office revisions did not affect active positions

The Sheriff’s Office entered the budget cycle with a higher request than the county was prepared to fund based on projected revenues. After an appeal and weeks of discussions between commissioners, the sheriff and budget staff, spending authority was adjusted to align with the countywide financial picture.

The original proposal reflected a reduction of 18 unfilled positions, while the final adopted budget reduced 14 unfilled positions. 

Originally the county requested all departments produce a budget proposal with a 10 percent reduction. The Sheriff’s Office then presented a flat budget with no reductions. The county countered with a recommendation of a 6.2 percent reduction which led to the appeal, and the final adopted budget shows that they settled at about a 5 percent reduction. 

In a follow-up email Budget Manager Diane Jakowski said the county also funded additional wage and benefit increases for the Sheriff’s Office, which amounted to more than $1 million, and it reflected in why the Sheriff’s Office’s 2026 vs. 2025 general fund budget doesn’t appear reduced as much year over year.

During the earlier appeal meeting, Jakowski said funding for positions is allocated to the Sheriff’s Office through the county’s general fund, but it is ultimately up to the sheriff whether those dollars are used to fill positions or directed toward other operational needs.

The FY 2026 Adopted Budget: Summary Schedule shows $41.3 million appropriated for Sheriff’s Office operations in 2026. Sheriff Todd Rowell said he estimated the department would return up to $3 million in unused funds to the county by the end of 2025.

Unfunded state mandates and local budget pressure

Throughout the budget process, county officials raised concerns about the growing cost of unfunded mandates imposed by the state of Colorado. According to figures published on Mesa County’s “Fix It or Fund It” webpage, the county estimates it spends more than $8 million annually complying with state requirements that do not come with dedicated funding, with costs spread across multiple departments.

The two largest sources of those estimated costs are the Sheriff’s Office and the District Attorney’s Office, which together account for roughly $5.6 million per year in unfunded mandate expenses. Both are independently elected offices over which commissioners do not have direct operational control.

Under Colorado law, specifically CRS 29-1-304.5, state mandates that increase required services or standards for local governments must be accompanied by state funding. If adequate funding is not provided, those mandates are not binding.

Capital improvement spending totals $49.1 million

Mesa County plans to invest $49.1 million in capital improvements during 2026, according to the 2026 CIP Budget: Adopted Expenditures. Projects include road and bridge work, facility improvements, technology upgrades, justice infrastructure, and long-term asset preservation.

Major transportation investments include Orchard Avenue improvements totaling approximately $6.1 million, the 38 Road Bike and Pedestrian Improvement Project at $6.9 million, E Road reconstruction at $5 million, countywide asphalt overlay work at $3.5 million, Riverfront Trail improvements at $625,000, 17 Road improvements at $1.5 million, and rehabilitation work on the Mesa Q 6.8 Bridge.

Justice-related projects include $1.5 million for Justice Center renovations and $2.75 million in rebudgeted costs for the Justice Center North Addition.

Facilities improvements include $3.7 million for HVAC replacements and $450,000 for a maintenance shed on the Clifton Campus.

County technology investments include $400,000 for networking and infrastructure, $275,000 for personal computer replacements, $50,000 for security camera upgrades, $400,000 for Workday system maintenance and buildout, and $1 million for CJ software.

Transit upgrades include $2.8 million for new buses.

Revenue structure and fund balances

The FY 2026 Adopted Budget: Sources and Uses of Funds outlines total countywide revenues of $242.9 million. These include: $104.49 million in property, sales, use and specific ownership taxes; $81 million in federal and state intergovernmental revenue; $45.9 million in user charges and fees; and $4.8 million in transfers.

The general fund includes $91.7 million in revenue and is supported by a $10.8 million reserve heading into 2026, according to the FY 2026 Adopted Budget: Summary Schedule.

Across all funds, personnel costs total $121.8 million, and capital expenditures total $56.2 million.

Jakowski said changes in the capital fund are largely the result of project dollars rolling forward from the prior year.

“A lot of projects didn’t get finished last year. Those project revenues don’t show up in our 2026 revenue, but as fund balance,” she said. “That’s really the biggest drawdown on the fund balance during the year.”

Jakowski told commissioners the county expects to draw down its general fund balance in 2026 in response to revenue shortfalls, but she said the county is positioned to absorb the impact.

“We have a really good buildup of fund balance over the past five years or so,” she said. “That buildup is key to getting through the next couple of years.”

Commissioner Cody Davis said the board wanted to be transparent about the fund balance reduction.

“That is what fund balance is for,” Davis said, adding the county is committed to rebuilding reserves in the future.

Staffing changes and workforce realignment

Mesa County’s authorized staffing level for 2026 is 1,249.85 full-time-equivalent positions, a reduction of 34.05 positions from 2025.

Some staffing increases reflect internal reorganizations rather than new positions. Natural Resources shows an increase of 15 FTEs due to positions being moved into the department as part of a restructuring of land management and wildfire mitigation functions. Other increases include three positions in Road and Bridge and one each in Animal Services and the Mesa County Attorney’s Office.

Departments with reductions include Public Health with a decrease of 13.05 positions, Facilities and Parks with a decrease of nine positions, Criminal Justice with a decrease of eight positions, the Sheriff’s Office with a reduction of 14 vacant positions, and County Administration with a reduction of two positions.

County leaders said no filled positions were eliminated.

Commissioners reflect on budget process

During the final vote, commissioners reflected on the challenges of the year and thanked staff for their work preparing the budget.

“This definitely was not an easy budget. But I’m really proud of the work that we’ve done and the communication that we’ve had with the public,” Daniel said.

Commissioner JJ Fletcher said the process reflected the county’s strategic plan, noting, “We identified the accountability piece and transparency. I think we’ve done an excellent job here today with proposing and putting together the finalized budget.”

Davis described 2026 as “the toughest budget year in my tenure,” adding the process helped the county “really look to what’s most meaningful and what the true, proper role of government is.”