SLO County finalizes $1.2B budget that ‘reflects restraint’ amid volatile future
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted the final county budget for fiscal year 2026-27 on Tuesday.
In a 5-0 vote, supervisors finalized the $1.2 billion spending plan, ultimately making no changes to the recommended budget and approving all supplemental suggestions made during the June 8 budget hearing, according to the staff report.
County CEO Matt Pontes said this year’s budget “reflects restraint.”
The county was originally slated to have a nearly $1 million budget deficit in March, but it managed to close the gap in the face of a volatile fiscal future that could keep fluctuating amid possibly disruptive funding actions at the state and federal levels, he added.
“While San Luis Obispo County remains fiscally stable, we continue to face challenges associated with constrained revenue growth, uncertainty around state and federal funding, increasing operational costs, and the forecasted structural budget pressures in future years,” Pontes said at the June 8 hearing.
A few changes were made to the initial recommended budget ahead of the hearing. The county was originally set to cut 22 jobs (mostly limited-term positions), but after identifying some grant funding, it added a total of 19 positions, according to a county PowerPoint presentation. That included 8 jobs at the public health and behavioral health departments, as well as one position at the Sheriff’s Office.
The adopted budget now reflects a decrease of just three positions, SLO County’s assistant chief executive officer Lisa Howe told The Tribune.
Out of the total budget, the governmental funds budget, which funds government services and programs, is $1.02 billion, and within that, the proposed general fund budget — containing core government services — is nearly $835 million.
The special districts budget — which funds flood control, wastewater, fire protection and road maintenance, among other community services — was also approved at $74.5 million.
Proprietary funds make up the final portion of the total budget. This includes enterprise funds, such as airports, and internal service funds for county operations, like some public works financing.
The new funding will kick off at the beginning of the fiscal year on July 1, but the board will return to legally adopt the final budget in September.
SLO County supervisors deny funding request for DA’s Office
Even though the 2026-27 fiscal year budget represents a less dire financial outlook compared to the last fiscal year when the county slashed $38 million and cut nearly 155 mostly vacant jobs, budget talks were not without controversy.
In mid-May, District Attorney Dan Dow issued a formal notice to the county that he would consider taking legal action if the budget failed to fund more positions for his office.
The District Attorney’s Office initially requested a new paralegal and a new elder abuse vertical prosecutor in February, which the county did not fund in its recommended budget. At the May 19 SLO County Board of Supervisors meeting, Dow requested the two positions again, as well as funds for three more roles — a victim witness advocate, an administrative assistant and a felony deputy district attorney.
In total, the five positions would have cost $857,839. The DA’s Office was already set to receive a nearly 5% increase in funding, equaling almost $19.5 million in general fund support and just over $924,000 more than it received during fiscal year 2025-26, according to the recommended budget.
During the June 8 hearing, Dow said the county had a “legal obligation” to fund the five requested positions.
“If the budget that is given to any of the public safety agencies is not adequate ... and if it materially impairs our constitutionally mandated functions, then it crosses a legal line,” Dow told supervisors. “You have the authority and the responsibility to fund these positions.”
The county presented supervisors with possible funding options for three of the five requested positions, including drawing upon opioid settlement funds and Proposition 172 trust funds, according to a PowerPoint presentation.
But ultimately, SLO County supervisors voted 3-2 against funding any additional positions at the District Attorney’s Office.
Supervisor Jimmy Paulding, the chair of the board, said the decision was about “living within our means” as the county must choose between several competing interests to fund public safety departments.
The county has to “make strategic decisions around the most critical priority,” he said.
Supervisors Dawn Ortiz-Legg and Bruce Gibson echoed Paulding, pointing out that the county must practice fiscal conservatism in the face of uncertainty at the federal level and a potential super El Niño this winter.
Supervisors Heather Moreno and John Peschong voted in favor of funding the DA Office’s request.
On Tuesday, even though Peschong voted to adopt the final budget, he said he would “continue to fight” for funding additional positions in the District Attorney’s Office.
