WALLACE — The Shoshone County Commissioners met Thursday evening with County Clerk Lori Osterberg to discuss the county’s upcoming budget. What began as a routine meeting ended abruptly after a commissioner proposed a controversial solution to address deep cuts to the sheriff’s office. 

Following Osterberg’s budget presentation, Commissioner David Dose suggested the county consider allowing the sheriff’s office to pursue an override levy to offset severe budget shortfalls. 

In Idaho, override levies can be temporary or permanent and are used to fund specific needs not covered by the regular budget. The amount and duration of a levy depend on voter approval and the funding required. 

Counties in Idaho can increase property taxes by up to 3% annually without voter approval, a measure Shoshone County has used during the past two budget cycles. Dose, anticipating another increase, expressed frustration at the idea of raising taxes while simultaneously cutting public services. 

Earlier in the week, Shoshone County Sheriff Holly Lindsey had presented a “worst-case scenario” budget at Osterberg’s request. The proposal included $950,000 in cuts, approximately 18% of the department’s budget, which Lindsey said would significantly reduce patrol staffing and coverage. 

Osterberg’s request was reportedly prompted by a projected revenue shortfall that would prevent the county from fully funding the department. 

“Looking at the numbers the clerk has assembled here, that’s supporting a budget where we are looking at massive cuts to law enforcement,” Dose said. “I think it’s time to consider that our system is failing. The state and federal monies coming in are not keeping up with the mandates. We can’t raise taxes enough to provide services at the level we’ve been providing. We’re raising taxes and cutting services at the same time in this budget.” 

Dose then proposed his idea. 

“I would like to suggest to the board one solution to look at would be letting the people decide specifically on law enforcement,” he said. “If they want to raise their own taxes through a levy to keep law enforcement where it’s at and sustain it, versus what we’re doing here and cutting it.” 

He defended the proposal on two points: first, that it would be decided by voters, not the Board of County Commissioners, and second, that it would address a structural issue in the county’s budget process. Each department pays administrative fees to the clerk, who then redistributes those funds into the county’s general fund. 

Dose acknowledged the limitations of available funding but insisted that voters should have a say if the board intends to approve a budget that reduces law enforcement services. 

“We’re going to have to cut,” he said. “The 3% won’t cover the rising costs. I don’t want to pay more taxes, but I don’t want to live in Portland, Oregon.” 

While no specific amounts were discussed, Dose floated the idea of consulting an attorney who specializes in levies to explore options and determine what the sheriff’s office might request, likely the 18% cut outlined in Lindsey’s proposal. 

His fellow commissioners disagreed with his Portland analogy, prompting Dose to clarify that he meant he didn’t want to live in a place where law enforcement services were being actively reduced. 

Commissioner Melissa Cowles did not endorse Dose’s proposal and alleged that other ideas had been suggested, but hadn't been considered. 

“I think we need to explore everything and be strategic,” Cowles said. “There are other ideas that have been thrown out that we all need to look at, too.” 

She emphasized the need to be deliberate in deciding where and how to make cuts and to exhaust all alternatives before placing any measure before voters. 

Any item intended for the November ballot must be submitted by the end of August, giving Dose and Lindsey less than two business weeks to finalize and present their proposal to the board.