How would you like to have the opportunity to spend $56 million?

If this sounds like fun to you, you should run for county commissioner in the next election, as that is the amount in the Core General Fund that the three commissioners are tasked to allocate every year. And the numbers keep getting bigger, which is not terribly surprising to any of the country’s residents who have observed firsthand that their annual property tax bill is ever increasing. In 2018, the county budgeted revenues of nearly $30.2 Million. Add a few million more to the pot every year and you arrive at today’s approved budget.

There are numerous moving parts to the budget process, as I have found out firsthand. For the past 15 months, I have been a part of a Citizens Advisory Committee that was established to provide guidance to the county commissioners with respect to the annual budget. (The views expressed in this opinion piece reflect my personal opinions, not necessarily the views of the Advisory Committee). This subject matter can get extremely complicated, but from my perspective it boils down to the following: from 2017 to 2025 the county’s revenues (i.e. taxes, licenses and grants) have doubled ($28.8 million to $56 million); what did the 31,000 people who call this place “home” get in return for these increases?

It is not an easy question to answer, mainly because the county’s revenues, per its official books, come from numerous sources and are allocated into several different accounts (including a general operating fund and Strong Future taxpayer-approved fund). Similar issues arise when dealing with the expenditures. But look at the 2025 budget and its four-page Table of Contents outlining its 330 pages of budget analysis (before appendices). It’s amazing to me how much time, effort and plain hard work goes into the creation of this mammoth document. Our entire committee has seen the dedication of county workers and can applaud the direction from the county commissioners and the effort across all county departments to successfully pass a budget for 2025.

While all appears well, there are problems lurking on the immediate horizon. When the 2025 budget was approved, the core budget of the General Fund was “balanced” only because it was propped up by a $4.6 million transfer from other funds. The budget reflects deficits and drawdowns in capital and other funds, which is common given how the revenues are received and how (and when) they have allocated to spend the funds. While the county finances of the core budget rely on various one-time transfers from other funds, these transfers will be increasingly difficult to use in the years ahead as the fund balances decrease. In other words, at some point the flow of money from the county’s special revenue funds could begin to run out. For instance, without transfers, the core General Fund will likely begin the 2026 budget cycle with a $5 million gap between revenues and expenditures (before consideration of normal inflationary increases). It’s fair to say that the county commissioners will need to make some difficult financial decisions less than one year from now.

As the 2026 budget cycle gets underway, it is heartening to hear that the county staff have begun to build a multi-year budget to enhance fiscal planning. But additional attention to the spending side of the budget will be needed. Last fall, the Advisory Committee recommended that the commissioners take a close look at the primary spenders, especially public safety and the Sheriff’s Office. Although some departments have maintained a lean operation, the bulk of the recent spending increases has gone for public safety. For instance, human services experienced a modest increase from $5,013,930 in 2018 to $6,024,214 in 2025, roughly in line with inflation. By contrast, public safety spending soared from $9,707,614 in 2018 to $22,480,428 in 2025 — giving it the largest increase in spending authority among the major categories of the General Fund budget, both in terms of dollars and percentage gains.

It is important for all of us to understand why the public safety component of the budget has increased at a rate not experienced by other departments. To be sure, spending increases during the early part of this period were needed to address the sheriff’s difficulty in filling open positions. But have all of the more recent increases been truly necessary? Is there significantly more criminal activity today than there wasseven years ago? Of course, safety is paramount for all of us, residents and those just visiting. However, the importance of human services cannot be overstated. Included within this generic category are services such as veterans, Head Start, senior center, public and environmental health, along with nursing home and youth and family services. Hard to imagine that these services are experiencing less need today than in the past.

A day will come when the money pot that the commissioners must work with is constrained. When (not if) this happens, we want to know that we have a plan in place to deal with adverse financial conditions. The sooner the better with respect to this plan.

Scott M. Estill’s column “Challenges, Choices, Changes” publishes biweekly on Thursdays in the Summit Daily News. Estill is an attorney, author, and public speaker who lives in Dillon when not traveling or attending to legal matters in Denver. Contact him at scott@scottestill.com.