Colfax County commissioners propose cutting unapproved, vacant positions to narrow $881,575 general‑fund shortfall

Colfax County commissioners spent most of a budget workshop on how to close a roughly $881,575 shortfall in the general fund, directing staff to remove three positions that had been added to the salary schedule without the commission’s prior approval and asking for further analysis before final votes.

Ty, the county’s budget presenter, said the county’s latest numbers show general‑fund revenues around $9,000,001.59 and expenditures of about $10,000,041, leaving an $881,575 deficit. "After some early morning discussion, I think we've got the deficit down to about $300,000 to spread out through the general fund," Ty said as she outlined scenarios that remove vacant positions to produce about $580,000 in savings.

Ty listed the vacant or newly added lines she included in the scenarios: manager’s‑office savings (including a Jonah position and an IT director line) about $193,000; two maintenance positions $129,000; a part‑time treasurer slot $30,008.64; two jail positions $113,000; one road position $57,000; and one airport position $56,000. Ty said she left the county‑attorney/position‑attorney line out of the savings calc because the contract expires in October and the commission had not decided whether to hire in‑house or continue contracting.

Commissioners pressed for more detail before approving cuts as final policy. Commissioner Weir urged caution about net savings, saying cutting budgeted positions can increase overtime and other ancillary costs that would offset reductions: "So it doesn't make sense to cut staff if we're not gonna have savings," he said, asking staff to model overtime impacts. Warden Slade warned that overtime is partly automatic for required training and that reductions could increase overtime if staff call out.

County manager also recommended retaining contracted IT support rather than converting the contractor to a full‑time employee unless the accounting shows a net savings; managers said the contractor (referred to in the discussion) has been valuable and that cross‑training an internal employee is underway.

On a concrete step, commissioners agreed to remove three salary‑schedule additions that had been placed on the schedule without prior commission approval: the IT‑director line, an added maintenance position, and the part‑time treasurer slot. The chair said, "So let's take those 3 positions out," and multiple commissioners signaled agreement while requesting confirmation of where the contractor costs currently reside in the budget so the commission can document the real savings.

The commission directed Ty and the county manager to return with two items for the next meeting: (1) a five‑year comparison of recurring versus nonrecurring expense growth (Commissioner Weir highlighted this as a key basis for allocating cuts by growth), and (2) a more detailed modeling of expected overtime and other ancillary costs tied to proposed headcount reductions.

The workshop closed with procedural scheduling: the commission set a budget workshop for the following Tuesday at 8 a.m. and a special meeting to consider final budget approval on July 30 at 9 a.m.; the county manager noted the special meeting must be advertised within 72 hours.

What happens next: commissioners asked staff to return with the five‑year analysis and overtime estimates so that any final cuts can be weighed against realistic net savings and operational impacts.