Finance committee previews 2026 budget with staffing proposals, higher insurance costs and GIS investment

City Manager Boyer outlined the city’s proposed budget schedule and department requests at a finance committee meeting, telling committee members the presentations will cover department-by-department budgets leading to a November public hearing and formal readings of the tax levy and budget. “I’d like to start out with our proposed schedule for the budget,” Boyer said, summarizing dates for departmental presentations and public hearings.

The committee heard staff describe several staffing proposals and several recurring cost increases that drove most department-level budget increases. The most discussed items were a part-time administrative position shared across the city clerk, finance and human resources; a proposed code-enforcement/building inspector position; and investment in GIS and information-systems support for utility and field staff. Staff also pointed to a widespread rise in medical-insurance costs as a major driver of higher department totals.

Why it matters: The presentations are the staff-level step that will shape the city’s 2026 appropriations and the tax-levy readings. The committee did not adopt the draft budget at the meeting; members asked clarifying questions and flagged items for follow-up before formal readings and votes.

Boyer presented a calendar of upcoming budget work. He said the committee would review police and fire budgets together, then go through utilities, public works and other funds; staff said a public hearing is scheduled for Nov. 17 and the council will take the first reading of the tax levy and appropriations documents that same week, with second readings planned for Dec. 1.

Staff detailed specific department requests - City clerk: The packet includes funding for a half-time administrative support position to help with minutes backlog and routine work, to be shared across the clerk, finance and HR functions. Boyer said the city is budgeting the position now and “probably hire somebody maybe in the spring,” adding the hire could occur in spring 2026 if approved and funded. - Finance and HR: Staff said roughly 25% of that shared position is budgeted to finance and 25% to HR; finance also moved audit fees into its departmental accounting for clarity. - City manager/mayor offices: Small increases only; staff noted training and wage-withholding changes drive modest upward pressure. - Police and fire: Onboarding and medical-exam costs previously categorized as training were recategorized to better reflect those expenses for new hires. - Communications: Staff increased the printing line for the monthly newsletter (listed in the packet at $35,000) and added funds for citizen-engagement materials and outreach at events. - Community development and building: The grant-manager position was removed from wages; consulting services now include outside grant-management and lobbyist funds (listed in the packet at about 61.5 on the department line). Building services show a proposed additional building inspector/code-enforcement position; staff said the city is holding off final hiring decisions until a new community-development director is in place. - Human resources: The HR budget includes the shared half-time administrative position and additional funds earmarked for recruitment services (the packet lists an entry shown as 65.40; the packet did not specify whether that is dollars in thousands or another unit). - MIS/IT and GIS: Staff proposed investing in GIS updates and field technology to speed “utility locates” and reduce field crew time. Kurt told the committee the GIS work would cut locate time and improve maps of buried infrastructure. Staff described the position as budgeted as a half-time role to be shared with water and sewer; at one point staff described it as “one full-time person shared half and half,” creating an ambiguity staff said they would clarify. Kurt said better mapping “will really cut that time down” for field crews. An outside consultant added that programs such as lead-service-line replacement are much harder and more expensive when accurate buried-infrastructure records are missing. - Interdepartmental items: Staff recommended adding cyber insurance to the city’s package after discussions with the carrier, noting examples of costly ransomware incidents elsewhere. The interdepartmental section also reflects the city’s share of retirees’ medical insurance, merchant/credit-card fees for permit payments (which staff said are recouped on the revenue side), bond-debt transfers to the debt-service fund, and a transfer that supports landfill operations.

Questions and clarifications from the committee included why medical-insurance costs are rising across nearly every department, and whether the proposed hires should be full-time or part-time. Michelle, a staff member handling benefits and insurance renewals, said, “Medical insurance rates are just going crazy,” and noted the city’s January 1 renewal and efforts to work with carriers to limit increases. On the GIS position, staff acknowledged the budget packet lists a half-time post, and said they would return with a firm staffing plan and clearer cost presentation.

Actions taken at the meeting were procedural. The committee approved the meeting agenda (motion by Sellers, second by Parker) and approved minutes from Oct. 28 and Nov. 12 (motion by Clem, second by Sellers); both motions carried on voice vote. No budget line items were adopted at the meeting.

Next steps: Staff said they will return with any requested clarifications and adjustments; the packet indicates the council will hold a public hearing on Nov. 17 and proceed with readings of the tax levy and appropriations documents that week, with final readings scheduled for Dec. 1. Committee members asked staff to provide a bonds schedule and payment timing from the audit and to clarify staffing FTEs, insurance assumptions and any recruitment-service dollar amounts before formal adoption.