Stevensville council debates FY2025-26 budget, members raise packet and accounting concerns

Stevensville — On Sept. 11, 2025, the Stevensville Town Council held an extended public discussion of the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget, including proposed capital-asset accounts for water and sewer, an airport fuel-tank rehabilitation project financed with federal and state grants, and an insurance payment tied to recent wind damage. A motion to adopt the budget (Resolution No. 574) was made and seconded, and councilors debated several line items and documentation requirements; the transcript does not record a final roll-call vote on the adoption in the portion provided.

The council held a separate, recorded vote earlier in the meeting to amend the prior-year budget. Councilor Parker moved and Councilor Smith seconded Resolution No. 573, described in the packet as “a resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Stevensville, Montana providing for the amendments of the budget for the 24‑25,” and that motion passed 3–0, as recorded in the minutes.

Why this matters: the annual budget sets tax levies, department appropriations, planned capital investments and staffing levels. During the meeting councilors questioned whether the packet included a required personnel roster showing positions, salaries and benefits and whether the top-line general‑fund figures balanced, issues that members said should be resolved before final approval.

Finance officer Robert (first name used in meeting) reviewed amendments and special revenues. He told the council that a grant from House Bill 357 provided $147,000 that had been spent on Spring Street and railroad work. He said the town had created a street equipment/capital asset fund and cited a transfer the packet showed as “$2,222,595” into that fund. Robert also described planned transfers into water and sewer capital accounts — he said the water capital‑asset account would receive $600,000 drawn from the water operating fund and that the sewer capital account would receive $400,000, amounts the finance presentation tied to making operating funds align with anticipated asset replacements.

Robert reported the airport fuel‑tank rehab would be supported primarily by grants: “federal grant of $534,001.70” and a state grant of $39,333, figures he read into the record. He also told the council the town expected roughly $49,000 in miscellaneous revenue that is “most of” an insurance claim for wind damage and listed intended repairs paid by that claim (a new pavilion roof and a fence among items listed in the packet).

Council debate focused on three recurring themes: documentation, accounting detail and quorum/participation. Multiple councilors pressed for a separate schedule listing each position, salary and benefits for the prior, current and proposed budget years — a schedule they said is called for by statutory guidance cited in the discussion. Councilor Bartlett moved to table the budget until the full council could be present; the chair sought a second and later recorded that the motion to table failed for lack of a second as shown in the transcript excerpt.

Councilors and members of the public also pressed staff for clarity on cash‑reserve calculations. Robert explained that some apparent variances reflected investment income or cash‑carryover and that the general fund target cash‑reserve remained within the town’s stated policy range. He told the council the reconciliation performed after closing the prior year’s books increased beginning cash by about $33,700 compared with earlier drafts of the packet.

The meeting record shows the council directed staff to walk through the line items with department heads and to provide clarifying materials to the council and public; Gina (finance staff) and Robert presented details during the discussion. Councilors asked for a clear personnel schedule and clearer printed worksheets before acting further. The transcript excerpt ends after the mayor said he was “comfortable taking a vote,” but the final roll call on Resolution No. 574 is not included in the provided portion.

Context and next steps: staff said HDR consultants have identified potential state grant opportunities for a drinking-water storage tank; councilors were told that eligible grant programs and matching requirements are still preliminary. Robert said the airport and water/sewer asset accounts were intended to increase transparency by holding money for equipment and infrastructure replacement in discrete accounts rather than the previous pooled approach.

Public comment during the budget discussion stressed the importance of full council participation and clear public access to the salary/position listing. Councilors also debated the timing and publication of the packet materials; the clerk reported the packet and notice had been available in the town office and online prior to the meeting.

At the end of the provided transcript, councilors had not recorded a final adoption vote for Resolution No. 574 in the portion supplied; staff said they would continue to answer questions and provide the requested schedules for council and public review.