The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
Public hearing at 5:30 p.m. next Tuesday
By Katherine Nettles
The Gunnison County 2025 budget has been essentially finalized, and after two work sessions with departmental overviews this fall and additional work sessions for specific areas of interest, county commissioners will host the final draft public hearing on Tuesday, December 10 at 5:30 p.m.
The county’s total budget is projected at $213 million in revenues, $158 million in expenditures and excess revenue of $54 million. The revenues for 2025 are much larger than previously, with 2024 projections at $91 million as opposed to 2025’s budget of $213 due to $133 million in “interfund transfers & other” which includes $117 million that was budgeted as revenue bond proceeds for the Whetstone Community Housing project through the county’s housing authority. Expenditures include $25.9 million in personnel, $45.5 million in operations and $87.6 million in capital expenses.
The Rural Transportation Authority (RTA), which is funded by a sales tax and whose budget is approved separately by its own board of directors but housed within the county, has an estimated $6 million in tax collections and additional $3 million in other revenues including grants, service charges and investment income. The RTA expenditures for 2025 are estimated at $9.9 million for a deficit which will come out of RTA reserves.
Similarly, The Gunnison Valley Health (GVH) budget, approved independently by its own board of directors but housed within the county, has an estimated $104 million in revenues and $97 million in expenditures for an excess of $6.8 million.
Within the county’s budget the general fund is estimated to bring in $25.3 million and expend $25.7 million with a deficit of $336,000. Road and Bridge will bring in an estimated $7.2 million and expend $7.4 million for a deficit of $172,000. Health and Human Services is expected to generate $6.2 million and expend $6.28 million for a deficit of $78,000. The Local Marketing District, which collects a lodging tax, is estimated to bring in $3.4 million in revenue and expend $3.9 million for a deficit of $533,000. The airport fund is estimated to bring in $6.4 million and expend $6.2, sewer fund is estimated to bring in $1.7 million and expend $1.4 million, the water fund is expected to bring in $776,000 and expend $714,000 and solid waste (landfill) is estimated to bring in $1.7 million and expend $3.1 million for a $1.3 million deficit.
Capital Expenses are funded to expend $1.5 million, and the county’s recently re-activated housing authority (separate from the Gunnison Valley Regional Housing Authority) is funded to expend $71 million. Other major expenditures are $2.5 million for Public Health, $82,000 for the Conservation Trust, $1.3 million for Land Preservation, Gunnison Sage Grouse management at $127,000 and Risk Management at $100,000.
The budget allots $68,500 for seven community based organizations, including the Gunnison Conservation District ($8,000); Gunnison Country Food Pantry ($12,000), Gunnison Valley Animal Welfare League ($11,500); Gunnison Valley Health Foundation ($11,500); Project Hope of the Gunnison Valley ($10,500); and Six Points Evaluation and Training, Inc. ($12,000).
Commissioners held two work sessions this fall to prepare the draft budget beginning with a general presentation from the finance department on October 15, then individual presentations from department heads on November 26. Some topics that came up were the general fund balance, Road and Bridge funds and Health and Human Services.
“We are budgeting for a decrease in overall fund balances of close to $5 million,” said Birnie.
Former finance director Perry Solheim had asked commissioners during the initial presentation for policy guidance on keeping slightly smaller fund balances in various areas. “Would it be better to use that money now rather than just holding on to it for a rainy day? And I think we’re right sized on our general fund but I think there’s ways that we can look at that with a sharper pencil,” he said.
Birnie had added, “But as we approach issuing the most debt the county ever has for the Whetstone project more is better. Yes, we will have a moral obligation to back the county housing authority on that debt issue, so they will want to see an exceedingly strong balance sheet to counter balance that. It’s a new initiative in an area that we’ve just begun to do work, and will be the first public debt offering we’ve taken for housing.”
Commissioner Laura Puckett Daniels asked about general fund expenditures as well. Birnie described the county’s long-standing practice, “In the big picture what you see in the general fund is often it does look like we’re spending more than we’re bringing in, and that is on purpose. We budget revenues conservatively and expenditures aggressively. And that way our surprises are always to the good,” he said.
Public Works director Martin Schmidt reviewed the county’s long-standing Road & Bridge shortfalls based on Highway Users Tax Fund (HUTF) and severance tax. Maintenance functions like patching potholes take up the bulk of the county’s funds. “What we are able to do with the funding we have is keep our roads on a steady decline,” he said. “What we can’t do is major road improvement projects.” Schmidt reported that the consultant study the department is conducting should be complete by the end of the year, and Road and Bridge will bring it to commissioners to determine what level of service they want and if/how to ask taxpayers for additional funding. In the meantime, he said the main thing is taking “little nibbles” out of the budget where possible to help keep the department afloat.
Health and Human Services director Joni Reynolds explained that in some cases COVID funding toward programs has finished, but state requirements create shortfalls. She said one issue is that universal preschool programming is pulling funding away from other things. “There is not enough infant and toddler childcare for everyone who qualifies, based on both funding and availability. It’s a double-edged sword there.” Reynolds noted that preventative services are not funded by the state, either. “It really is about trying to get better equity when it comes to the actual services we are being asked to provide,” she stated.
