Sonoma County Board of Supervisors approves $2.14 billion budget

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved on Friday the county’s $2.14 billion budget for the next fiscal yea.

The 5-0 vote followed daylong hearings Tuesday and Wednesday, where the board deliberated over how to allocate $67 million in discretionary funding with an eye on financial uncertainty in the years ahead.

At the start of hearings on Tuesday, County Administrator Sheryl Bratton advised the board that while the county is in “decent” financial shape heading into FY22-23, staffing shortages, looming labor negotiations and the threat of a recession could have significant impacts.

The county’s newly approved FY22-23 budget reflects a small 1.3% increase over the FY21-22 budget.

“We know the needs and the demands are going to exceed the means, I think we did a damn good job this year,” said Supervisor Lynda Hopkins. “It’s never easy.”

Hopkins said she thought the board made “critical investments” with its budget decisions.

The budget allows for 4,181 full-time employees, an increase of about 25 positions, with the cost of salary and benefits totaling around $792.6 million.

The general fund, the source that supports criminal justice and administrative departments and most discretionary spending, accounts for $556 million.

The board approved one-time funding for a series of recommendations from Bratton’s office, as well as items on a secondary list that covered park improvements, funding gaps and the creation of reserves for projects meeting criteria under the umbrellas of water, housing and community infrastructure.

Still, that framework didn’t resolve some disputes. Supervisors sparred Friday over concerns that some district projects would

Though board members agreed to the idea of creating funding buckets for water, housing and community infrastructure, a dust-up did occur between the supervisors Friday as some expressed concern that some projects would remain unfunded when brought back.

Supervisor Chris Coursey said he worried that Tierra de Rosas, a mixed-use commercial and residential project in Roseland that has languished for more than a decade, would lose out on funding from the housing bucket. Coursey requested $6.58 million to advance the project, but the request was deferred.

Coursey said he was concerned about bringing the project back later in the year when it would need a four-fifths vote to pass and “where a minority of the board can overrule the majority.”

Supervisor Susan Gorin echoed Coursey, expressing concern about the stakes for unfunded projects in her district, including park renovations and bike lanes.

At Bratton’s recommendation, the board voted to shore up reserves, allocate $2.8 million for a general plan update, add full-time positions to departments in charge of real estate, health services and emergency management and allocate $5 million to cover a funding gap for the county’s behavioral health unit.

While it funded several supplemental department requests, the board did opt to defer others until the end of September when county staff close the FY21-22 books.

Those included funding requests for consultants, administrative support, program planning and unfunded capital project activities from the Office of Equity, Human Resources, Permit Sonoma, General Services and the Clerk-Recorder-Assessor.

The board also is likely to revisit its discussion of how to best manage funds for each supervisor’s district office. Those costs are mainly covered by the budget of the County Administrator’s Office.

Following the vote, Supervisor David Rabbitt urged his colleagues to consider the need for future budget discussions geared more toward achieving savings, given the shaky economic outlook. Supervisors, he said, also should approach board decisions with a countywide lens, rather than immediately favoring the needs of their individual districts.

“Instead of looking for district-specific projects, which has been the norm for the last eight years as times have been flush, you have to start thinking more strategically,” Rabbitt said. “If there’s no money in the bank to keep staff working, providing the services in the county, there’s not going to be any money to do those projects.”

Coursey and Hopkins commended work on the new budget while looking ahead to future board discussions.

“We have to be able to work together to deal with the county’s pressing needs,” Coursey said. “I hope that we can focus more on county priorities in the future”

You can reach Staff Writer Emma Murphy at 707-521-5228 or emma.murphy@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @MurphReports.