Orange council reviews budget, eyes one-time uses for roughly $1.3 million Invista payment

Orange — At a February 2025 City Council budget workshop, staff reviewed the adopted fiscal year 2025 general fund and the proposed fiscal year 2026 budget and outlined how an unbudgeted payment of about $1.3 million from Invista could be used for one-time needs and reserves.

The discussion, led by Mister Coombs (staff member), centered on three main general-fund revenue sources — sales tax, payments in lieu of taxes under industrial district agreements (IDA), and property tax — and on a projection that total general-fund revenue for 2025 would be about $27 million, down from roughly $29–30 million in earlier years. Coombs emphasized the numbers presented were projections: “If we can grow our sales tax, we can shrink the other sources of revenue,” he said.

Why it matters: council members said the decision matters for property-tax policy, department services and one-time capital repairs. Staff recommended setting aside part of the Invista payment to preserve the option of lowering the property-tax rate in future budgets, while allocating smaller amounts to immediate needs such as vehicles, facility repairs, library materials and community projects.

Key figures and budget context - General-fund revenue projected for FY2025: about $27 million (staff called this a projection based on partial-year collections). - Sales tax: FY2025 budgeted at $4.7 million (down from a FY2024 budget of $5.7 million). - Payments in lieu of taxes (IDA): staff said the city received an unbudgeted payment from Invista of about $1,300,000 (described in the meeting as “1,308,000 and some change” / “about $1.3 million”). Staff noted IDA payments can be challenged and that IDA agreements are up for renewal in 2027. - Property tax rate: staff reported the current rate as $0.797 per $100 of taxable value and said the average taxable home value in the city is roughly $136,000; staff said the city raised the rate for the current year to stabilize revenue.

Staff recommendations and possible allocations Mister Coombs outlined a first-pass recommendation for how to use roughly $780,000 of the unbudgeted funds after earmarking an amount to preserve the possibility of lowering the property-tax rate. Recommended one-time or near-term items included: - Street rehabilitation: set aside $300,000 to begin larger paving or rehabilitation projects; staff noted major projects (like rehabilitating West Alley Paine) would cost far more than a single-year allocation. - Public safety vehicles and equipment: purchase three police Tahoes outright (estimated $136,000 total) rather than financing; consider an additional police side-by-side; fleet maintenance shop insulation and equipment. - Facilities and capital: city-hall roof planning/repair, generator at maintenance yard, awning for fleet fuel pumps, solar lighting at public facilities, culvert work on Huntsman Street, and continued demolition of substandard structures. - Parks, recreation and library: rec center equipment and storage, Cooper’s Gully improvements, more library books and radio-frequency security tags, and budget-books software for the finance office (estimated $7,000). - Employee allowances: a recommended uniform/personal-equipment allowance of about $500 per employee to help staff with safety/presentation needs. - Community programs: small grants or roll-off dumpsters to help residents complete property cleanups and a suggested modest allocation to begin a trap-neuter-release or volunteer animal program (amount not finalized).

Council discussion and cautions Councilmembers cautioned that one-time funds should be used carefully. Councilmember Miss Salter asked that the city be “financially prepared” before promising a lower tax rate and said the council should ensure adequate outlooks before signaling rate reductions to the public; Salter’s comments were discussed in the context of pending firefighter wage negotiations and a contractual reopener scheduled in February.

Process and next steps Coombs said the recommendations are preliminary and that any actual spending will require budget amendments presented to council in coming weeks. He urged council members to gather constituent input before the next meeting and said staff will return with formal amendment requests and cost detail. Multiple council members and staff noted that enterprise funds (water and sewer) are separate and cannot be paid from the general fund.

Ending The workshop closed with council direction to continue discussions and to return to formal budget amendments if the council chooses to proceed with the proposed one-time allocations. No formal budget amendment or final vote on allocations occurred at the workshop.