Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Fy2026 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews FY2026 draft budget: elections, IT, CCPD/MEDC transfers and downtown projects highlighted
Summary
Council examined FY2026 budget line items, including raising the November election estimate to $40,000, upgrades to livestream and records systems, CCPD and MEDC transfers to capital projects, and discussion of a planned $14 million water project; staff will return refined totals for the next workshop.
Council reviewed the FY2026 budget packet line by line and flagged several items for adjustment and follow up, ranging from higher election costs to computer‑technology upgrades and capital transfers for downtown development.
Elections: Staff reported the city’s shared cost for the November election totaled $35,858 for the last event and recommended increasing the FY2026 election line from $30,000 to $40,000 to allow a margin for inflation and shared‑cost fluctuations among participating jurisdictions. Council asked staff to request an itemized bill from the county to clarify the large increase compared with prior years.
Computer and AV technology: Staff proposed multiple computer‑technology line items, including a new livestream platform subscription (~$1,900 annually), records‑management scanning (Laserfiche) costs, internet services, server replacement and switch upgrades. Staff said the council chambers livestreaming system is obsolete and repeatedly fails; they proposed a replacement platform and a modest contingency line so the city can replace microphones, cameras or other AV components without returning midyear for budget adjustments. Staff noted most purchases will be portable or transferable to planned new facilities.
CCPD / MEDC / downtown projects: The packet reflected a reallocation of MEDC‑sourced funds. Historically the EDC transferred $200,000 to capital projects; the EDC (MEDC) has shifted additional funds to support downtown improvements, including streets and waterline replacements tied to a private development in the downtown core. Staff said MEDC moved $296,000 for downtown improvements and that they expect to start sign production and construction work early next year. Council discussed procurement of locally made signs as a possible cost‑saving strategy.
Water/sewer capital and funding options: A councilmember raised the city’s need to fund a projected $14 million water project. Staff said the city has been evaluating funding options and noted a recent debt service piece had fallen off the current year; the council directed staff to refine funding scenarios after final property‑tax and revenue estimates are available and to report back at the next workshop. The council also noted that legislative proposals could change property‑tax calculation and that the city’s consultant for tax collection is building updated models; staff said they had not yet run the state‑legislature scenarios through those models.
Other budget items: Staff recommended increasing the records‑scanning and records‑management lines (Laserfiche) to enable document scanning and retention, increasing computer replacement and server funds to stagger hardware replacements, and creating a small audiovisual contingency line for council chambers equipment. Police and CCPD budget breakout: staff reviewed CCPD (special district) items, including vehicle outfitting, radar and radio repairs and a mix of personnel and capital lines; staff and the police chief said they would reconcile totals where Excel totals differed from packet subtotals.
No formal budget ordinance was adopted at the workshop. Staff will reconcile spreadsheet totals (noting one CCPD subtotal discrepancy), incorporate directions including the TMRS Option 2 illustration and the Evergreen pay‑scale adoption, and return an updated package and a summary of totals for the next budget workshop in August. Council asked that staff highlight where proposed changes would use reserves, debt service or ad valorem revenue.
