Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maplewood council reviews draft budget showing $532,000 general-fund gap, projects revenue declines
Summary
City staff told the Maplewood City Council during a May 6 work session that the draft fiscal 2026 budget currently shows about a $532,000 pull from the general fund. Staff recommended further cuts and said revenue projections are being held conservatively amid falling monthly trends.
Staff presented the first draft of the fiscal 2026 budget at the Maplewood City Council work session on May 6, saying the general fund currently shows a projected $532,000 reduction in fund balance.
The draft was introduced by a staff presenter, who said the city is “looking at about $532,000, that we're dipping into our fund balance in our general fund.” The presenter said personnel costs account for the majority of general-fund spending and continue to grow faster than tax revenues.
Why it matters: a city’s general fund pays for core services. Staff told the council that without additional cuts, the city would dip into reserves next year; they asked the council to indicate priorities for possible deferrals, cuts or reallocation to aim for no change in fund balance.
Staff said they will return with a revised draft after three work sessions and additional line-item auditing. The presenter said staff will bring a “draft 2” to the work session on Tuesday, May 13; council review is scheduled to continue with first and second readings on May 27 and a final reading on June 10.
On revenue, staff reported a downward monthly trend beginning in January and said the city trimmed revenue projections for the current fiscal year and largely held next year flat. The presenter said, “Overall, yes” to a council question about a roughly 22% revenue decline projection, explaining the office preferred conservative budgeting given economic uncertainty.
Council members pressed staff on specific accounts where fund balances are negative or at risk. Staff pointed to the sewer-lateral fund as moving from deeper negative toward less negative and said fire-related capital requests could push that department’s fund balance into the negative if left unchecked. Staff noted transfers from special sales-tax accounts (fire sales tax, property tax “Prop P”) are used to supplement department budgets and explained how transfer lines appear in the consolidated fund table.
Staff also flagged that some capital projects are grant-dependent and must proceed if the grant is secured. They identified Greenwood and GRG as examples of grant-funded capital items that would move forward if grant conditions are met.
The council did not take any formal budget votes at the May 6 work session. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn, which passed by voice vote.
