Council reviews engineering budget, planned truck purchase and CDBG staffing changes

At a special Biloxi City Council budget workshop, staff reviewed the engineering department—s proposed fiscal 2026 operating budget, focusing on a planned vehicle purchase, staffing changes and the relationship between engineering and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects. Council members discussed capital needs, the timing of environmental reviews on CDBG-funded rehabs and the department—s head count.

The issue in brief: the engineering director said the department plans to buy one pickup to replace its oldest vehicle and to reduce head count through attrition and transfers. The city—s CDBG coordinator will retire, staff said, and the department expects to replace that role and transition one position to IT; the engineering department—s active head count is projected to fall from 17 to 15 over the next year.

Why it matters: engineering maintains the city—s baseline operations and designs capital projects. Changes to staffing or capital equipment can affect project schedules and the city—s ability to deliver infrastructure work linked to CDBG-funded rehabilitation and other grants.

Major details

- Vehicle purchase: The engineering director said the department budgeted roughly $60,000 for capital outlay to buy one truck, a state-bid standard Ford F-150 with four-wheel drive to replace the oldest vehicle in the fleet. The director said the city prefers state-bid purchases because they include warranties and standardized procurement; buying used vehicles requires multiple comparable quotes and can increase maintenance risk.

- Staffing and reorganization: The director said the engineering group currently shows 17 positions but expects the number to fall to 15 by next fiscal year as one role transfers to IT and another position is eliminated through attrition. The department is also accounting for the planned retirement of the city—s CDBG coordinator, Susan, and plans to hire a replacement who will overlap with Susan for training; the director said the retirement timing produces a near-term salary reduction in the department because Susan—s full-year salary is not budgeted.

- CDBG and environmental reviews: Council members asked how CDBG projects interact with engineering. The director said CDBG-funded infrastructure projects are typically handled as capital projects and that environmental reviews required by HUD vary by scope: "It really just depends on the type of project and where the project is. Minimum probably 30 to 60 days. If you find something, it could be a year." He added that most standard rehabs require routine lead- and asbestos-testing if the work touches building fabric, and those environmental tests are normally paid from CDBG funds.

- Professional services and one-time work: The director said a placeholder for "other professional services" is used for occasional needs such as specialized surveys, water-model runs and design support. He noted Neil Schafer runs the city water model and that model runs for large developments are billed as professional services rather than salaried work.

Discussion vs. decisions

- Discussion: Council members pressed for details on upcoming projects, the effect of environmental reviews on timetables for CDBG-funded rehabs, and the rationale for keeping the CDBG coordinator work under engineering rather than community development. Staff explained that many CDBG projects are infrastructure-heavy and that the coordinator historically has worked closely with engineering on those projects.

- Direction/assignment: Staff said they will compile ward-by-ward capital requests that council members had asked to submit so the engineering department can include them in capital planning.

- Formal action: At the start of the workshop the council voted to approve the meeting agenda (motion moved by Councilman Creel; seconded by Councilman Tisdale; motion carried). Later the council set a date for the next budget workshop (motion made by Councilman Tisdale; seconded by Parks Director Shoemaker; motion carried).

Context and next steps

Staff emphasized the department remains focused on routine operating costs while capital projects and CDBG-funded rehabilitation are primarily grant-funded. The council asked for clearer project lists and for staff to track environmental-review timing on CDBG projects so the body can better assess schedule risk. The next budget workshop will continue review of departmental budgets and any adjustments needed based on council direction.

Ending

Council members did not take a formal vote on the truck purchase or the staffing reallocations during this session; those items remain reflected in the proposed budget and will be revisited in subsequent budget workshops and ordinance actions when formal amendments or capital purchases are approved.