Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Huntington Park presents proposed FY 2025–26 budget; council debates staffing, elections and events funding
Summary
City staff presented a proposed FY 2025–26 budget that staff said closes a roughly $1 million prior deficit and produces a structurally balanced general fund, while increasing parks funding and relying more on grants for community development programs.
Staff presented the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget and sought council feedback as the city prepares for final adoption next week. Finance Director Jeff Jones and the city manager walked the council through revenue and expenditure assumptions, fund categories and department budgets.
Overview and fiscal position: Staff said the proposed budget closes a prior $1,000,000 deficit and produces a structurally balanced general fund for FY 2025–26. The presentation described five fund types — general fund, special revenue funds, fiduciary funds, enterprise funds and internal service funds — and noted timing lags in recognizing sales tax and other revenues. Staff proposed total revenues for FY26 near $97.8 million and forecast modest decreases in some revenues tied to sales and use tax trends.
Parks and grants: The draft budget increases parks and recreation funding by nearly 18%, staff said, and reduces general‑fund reliance for some community development activities by shifting programs to grants such as PLHA and CDBG. Staff also noted the city received a broadband grant for approximately $25,000,000; those revenues and expenditures were not yet fully recognized in enterprise fund forecasts until project spending plans and timing are finalized.
Municipal elections and other big‑ticket items: The city clerk reported higher forecasted municipal election costs tied to consolidated or stand‑alone elections. Staff said a stand‑alone special election could cost in the range of $800,000 to $1,000,000, while consolidating with county elections can substantially reduce per‑city costs.
Staffing and compensation debate: Council members questioned the proposal to continue or restructure an assistant city manager position. The city manager said an assistant helps cover gaps when director‑level positions go unfilled and estimated the assistant city manager budgeted salary at roughly $165,000–$170,000 with total cost including benefits near $200,000. The manager said eliminating the assistant position is possible but warned it would reduce the city’s internal capacity to cover vacant director roles unless director pay is adjusted to market levels to attract permanent hires.
Events, communications and the Art Walk: Communications staff and council members discussed special events budgeting and the Art Walk. Staff reported a discrepancy between what finance records show (about $11,900 spent on the Art Walk as of early May) and higher figures cited by event staff; finance said it will reconcile the difference. Council members debated centralizing event planning and whether to create an in‑house special events coordinator role rather than relying on existing staff who also have program responsibilities. Council members suggested tracking economic impact for events, consolidating event budgets into a single view and exploring grant funding to support community engagement activities.
Next steps: Staff will incorporate council feedback, investigate the bid protest on a separate construction contract (the council continued that item to the next meeting to allow staff time to analyze the protest), and return with final budget adjustments for adoption at the scheduled meeting next week.
Direct quotations in this article are attributed to speakers in the meeting record.
