Centerville council approves FY2025 budget amendments, sets 30% fund-balance policy

The Centerville City Council on June 25 approved Resolution 2025-11, a package of Fiscal Year 2025 budget amendments that recognize new revenues, allocate grant and donation money, cover higher-than-expected developer bond interest, and set a policy to return unspent wrap-tax dollars to dedicated funds.

The amendments, presented by Nate, a city staff member, cleared a public hearing with no public speakers and passed on a 4-0 roll call vote. Council actions included approving transfers to the parks and capital projects funds and authorizing use of fund balance for an expanded general-plan study.

City staff said the largest unplanned expense resulted from higher interest the city must now pay developers on cash bonds. "These are the developers that give us their cash bond. And then as they complete the work on their property, we refund the bond, but we are also now required to give them interest," Nate said, explaining the city originally budgeted $5,000 for that line but has spent far more as rates rose. Staff recommended using $50,000 of fund balance to cover the shortfall.

Nate outlined other revenue recognitions: a $25,000 Department of Homeland Security grant and $12,461 in donations for police radios and related equipment; $200 in donations for movies-in-the-park; and developer-paid engineering revenues and expenses that will be recognized but are net-neutral because developers cover those costs.

On planning, staff said the city’s general-plan contract expanded beyond initial expectations. "We had originally budgeted $60,000, but the contract was for, I think, 120, 130,000," Nate said, adding that continued scope increases mean the total is expected to be about $150,000 to $160,000. The Redevelopment Agency covered $40,000 of economic-development work, and staff asked the council to authorize $60,000 from fund balance toward the general-plan study.

Council members asked whether any prior-year funds remained reserved for the general plan. Nate said he did not recall expenditures last year and would verify. Council discussion noted the study will likely extend into the next fiscal year, requiring further amendments.

The council also approved accounting and fund-flow clarifications for the Whitaker Museum and wrap-tax distribution. Staff proposed that any unspent wrap-tax funds earmarked for the Whitaker be returned to the wrap-tax fund at year-end rather than remain in the unrestricted general fund. Under the city's wrap-tax allocation policy, staff will continue to distribute 85% to parks, 5% to the Whitaker Museum and 5% to the performing-arts center; the council approved treating any overage that arrives after July 1 as a contingency to be handled under that formula.

As a project-specific transfer, staff proposed directing $500,000 of wrap-tax funds to the parks fund for pickleball courts and a Community Park parking-lot expansion. Nate described the split as roughly $80,000 for the courts and about $400,000–$420,000 for the parking work, and staff also recognized about $8,000 in private donations for pickleball amenities.

On capital projects and equipment, the council recognized a $28,745 allocation for a bidirectional amplifier for police radios and an accounting amendment for a loader trade. Staff said the city received $178,000 for the trade-in of an older loader and purchased a new loader for $180,000, requiring an accounting entry that shows the full sale and purchase amounts even though only about $2,000 cash changed hands.

Nate framed the council’s fund-balance policy recommendation: "I'm recommending that we set our fund balance at 30%," he said, noting state code allows general-fund balances between 5% and 35% of revenues. The policy approved by the council directs any year-end amount above the 30% target to the capital projects fund; staff said the final calculation will be made after the fiscal year close, roughly in October.

The council opened a public hearing on the budget amendments; staff at the anchor location and online reported no members of the public were present. After closing the hearing, a council member moved to approve the resolution and another member seconded. Councilwoman Meacom, Councilwoman Hurst, Councilman Plummer and Councilwoman Hayman each voted "aye"; the motion passed 4-0. Councilman Summerhaze was excused.

The council had no additional business and adjourned the special meeting. Staff indicated some items related to the general plan and capital programming may return in future budget amendments or regular meetings for final accounting or additional appropriations.