Greenfield City Council held a special workshop June 5 to review the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 general fund budget and consider options to close an approximately $192,000 shortfall.

City Manager Wood told the council that after two rounds of department reductions the city’s gap had narrowed from roughly $1.2 million to about $192,000, and presented three broad options to cover the remainder: more line‑item cuts, personnel measures (a salary/step freeze or unpaid furlough days) or a limited use of fund balance.

The discussion mattered because the city’s prior-year surplus included federal ARPA funds the city must spend by Dec. 30, 2026, and because several major capital projects are funded outside the general fund. Wood said Greenfield received about $4.2 million in ARPA money in prior years and that much of the city’s recent cash was committed to enterprise projects, including wastewater treatment work funded from enterprise and ARPA allocations.

Council and staff reviewed revenue trends, department totals and capital improvement projects. The council packet and presentation showed a general‑fund budget near $20.1 million, personnel costs as the largest expenditure category, and a current general‑fund reserve balance the city characterized as about $10 million. Wood said the city’s total cash on hand remained “not a bad place to be,” reporting roughly $22.7 million in cash overall, but that the general fund’s one‑time and recurring revenue picture is tightening as federal and state grant flows slow.

Possible personnel options quantified in the presentation included a freeze on planned step increases (estimated to save about $272,000) and a work furlough scenario (discussed as a roughly 10‑day per employee model, with an estimated savings in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars). Wood warned that deeper cuts could affect training, temporary employees and morale.

A speaker from the labor side, Jay Donato of SCIU Local 521, urged the council to avoid “concessionary options” that would harm staff morale and asked the council to prioritize reserves over pay cuts. “Concessionary options hurts and disheartens your … staff,” Donato said during the public‑comment period.

Council members said they had received the full budget packet only that day and asked staff for more time and additional line‑item review. Several members said they did not want to implement salary freezes or furloughs without further analysis and alternatives. Mayor White and multiple council members directed staff to return with additional details and potential cuts; staff said it would continue the analysis and bring options back to the council ahead of the next scheduled meeting.

The workshop also reviewed capital projects funded outside the general fund, including wastewater treatment plant repairs (enterprise fund and ARPA), water main and sewer upgrades paid by impact fees, and several grant‑funded projects such as citywide generators and a dog‑park match that the presentation described as nominal general‑fund matches the council could consider funding to secure those grants.

No formal budget adoption or votes occurred at the workshop. The council’s clear direction at the meeting was to have staff continue to look for additional cuts and to return with a balanced proposal at a follow‑up meeting.