JACKSON, Wyo. — The Town Council and Teton County Commission met on Monday for the second time in two weeks to try to broker a deal that would help the County raise funding for a new Justice Center and help the Town plug up a $4 million revenue shortfall but ultimately could not reach a consensus.
The County’s proposed SPET initiative would ask voters to approve an additional penny of sales tax on goods and services to raise $88 million to replace what they’ve deemed an outdated and unsafe Teton County Courthouse. The County explored other financing options before deciding to go to voters.
State statute requires the Town’s approval of the proposition for it to appear on the Nov. 5 ballot, with a deadline of July 17, making the negotiations timely. The Town Council plans to meet for a regular meeting on July 15 and will discuss the item ahead of the deadline.
The two-hour meeting concluded with the County voting unanimously to support a revised joint department funding split to 38% from the Town and 62% from the County, contingent on the SPET for a Justice Center being approved by voters during the general election.
The funding split would be phased in over three years, with the shift happening on July 1, 2025, from the current 54/46 split to 57/43. On July 1, 2026, it would shift to 60/40 and then to 62/38 by July 1, 2027. The Town and County would also begin revising the governance of jointly funded departments by looking at Joint Powers Agreements (JPAs) for agencies such as Parks & Recreation, START, Fire/EMS and Pathways, beginning in 2025. If agreements can’t be made by July 1, 2031, the funding split will revert to being based on the proportion of the population living in town.
The Town voted 2-2, with Mayor Hailey Morton Levinson and Councilmember Jim Rooks in support and Councilmembers Jessica Sell Chambers and Arne Jorgensen against. Councilmember Jonathan Schechter was absent from the July 1 and July 8 Joint Information Meetings.
To shore up their roughly $4 million deficit, the Town proposed shifting the joint department funding split to 65% County, and 35% Town, which would increase the Town’s revenue by about $2 million per year. They also asked for the County to increase Lodging Tax collections by 2%, which would get them an additional $2 million per year.
The Town can impose a Town-wide Lodging Tax on their own but it cannot run alongside the current county-wide Lodging Tax. The County controls whether the current Lodging Tax will be increased or not, something the Commissioners did not collectively support during either meeting fearing that a second tax increase could sink both initiatives.
With Lodging Tax increases off the table from the County right now — Commission Chair Luther Propst did note that the commission directed their staff on July 8 to start exploring alternative funding measures — the discussion weighed heavily on the funding split percentages, the timeline for implementation and how governance of the joint departments might shift.
Councilmembers and Commissioners went back and forth trying to present funding splits that might sit well with the majority, discussing the 60/40 and 65/35 before landing on 62/38.
County Commission Vice-Chair Natalia D. Macker suggested the phased-in split approach at the July 1 meeting and further explained her rationale at the July 8 meeting, noting that it will also help keep the elected officials on a timeline for revising the JPAs, something she was adamant about if funding for joint departments surpassed 60% from the County.
Councilmember Jessica Sell Chambers wanted to see the SPET and an increase to the county-wide Lodging Tax on the ballot in November, regardless of it being off the table for the county.
“Compromise results in everyone losing and negotiation results in everyone winning,” Sell Chambers said. “I don’t think we are going about this in the right spirit. I think in some ways we are undermining the process of SPET ballot measures and tax questions on the ballot by the voters, these are decisions voters are capable of making for their tax dollars.”
Councilmember Jim Rooks responded to those comments, saying, “Who fails in compromise is extremist positions.”
He proposed alternatives for the funding split, trying to move the needle closer to the Town’s proposed 65/35 split and supported a phased-in approach. “I just don’t think we are in a position where we can not act,” Rooks said. “I really think it’s important to get that Justice Center underway right here, right now.”
Jorgensen said he was uncomfortable with the phased-in approach and wanted to start the 62/38 split in FY26. He also noted that the Town has had zero pushback on the SPET for the Justice Center.
“It feels like the Town is carrying the weight on the front end and back end,” Jorgensen said. “If I’m reading this right, it would be in the Town’s interest to not get to a decision by 2031, I don’t see how 2031 keeps us both at the table, it keeps the Town at the table but not the County.”
Commissioner Wes Gardner called the phase-in approach a “runway for both organizations to adjust.” Noting that about $2.5 million per year in expenses would move from the Town to the County, “we are lifting you up year over year and we are sinking year over year,” Gardner said.
Commissioner Mark Newcomb asked County Attorney Keith Gingery what enforcement would look like in the future if the Town or County refuses to pay their portion for joint departments.
“When we first wrote all these [JPAs] back in ‘04, these were partnerships, two entities trying to get along,” Gingery said. “It’s not as if you take these documents to court, or something.”
Newcomb then spoke to his colleagues, saying, “This funding split matters far less than we all think,” explaining that the Town and County will toss the proverbial “hot potato” back and forth next budget season if funding is short again.
According to a Town staff report, “for every 1% reduction/increase in the Town/County portion of the split, the Town/County share changes approximately $210,000 for recurring operations only, excluding capital.”
According to the July 15 Town Council regular meeting agenda, the Council will have a second chance to discuss the funding split memorandum of understanding [MOU], approved by the Council at the Monday, July 8 meeting.
“This item has been placed on the agenda to allow all members of Council to participate in this item, including making the same or an alternative motion on this topic,” the staff report states. “Staff notes that if the MOU is amended from what Teton County has already approved the County would need to reconsider the request.”
