Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budgeting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents challenge city budget math, cite reserve-day counts at Gun Barrel City special meeting
Summary
Two residents questioned the accuracy of the city manager's budget-savings figures and highlighted multi-hundred‑day reserve counts during public comments at the Oct. 6 Gun Barrel City Council special meeting.
At a special Gun Barrel City Council meeting on Oct. 6, 2025, two residents used the public‑comment period to question the accuracy of the city manager's budget figures and to highlight the city's reserve levels, members of the public said.
Amaris Faith, who identified herself as a resident of Pine Bloom, criticized the city manager's published savings figure for fiscal 2025 and accused the administration of using misleading calculations. "This city manager and city council have failed to bring the people the real facts," Faith said. She added that the manager's claim of "almost $185,000" in savings for FY25 did not match worksheets she had obtained and that the city staff's calculations included positions she said should not be counted.
Keith Bond, who gave his address as 262 Overlook Trail, presented a series of reserve‑day calculations he said came from documents produced in response to a public‑information request. Bond said total reserves in July 2023 were $3,000,851 (speaker's figure) and that reserve levels translated to approximately 236.83 days of operating reserves at that time. He said July 2024 reserves equated to about 194.37 days, and that as of July 2025 reserves equated to roughly 247.5 days. "Are we not comfortable in almost a year's worth of reserve to run this city?" Bond asked. He also referenced a $71,250 line item for proposed raises.
Neither speaker proposed formal council action during their allotted three minutes. The council did not respond with any vote during the public‑comment segment; council responses were limited to factual information, recitation of existing policy, or direction to staff, as noted at the start of public comment in the meeting.
The meeting record shows the comments were delivered during the public‑comment portion of the Oct. 6 special meeting; no subsequent staff report or council action on the budget or the reserve figures was recorded in the provided transcript excerpts.
