Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the City Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council reviews proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget; staff outlines new positions and one‑time costs

3696931 · June 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff presented the proposed FY 2025–26 budget, detailing operating expenditures, one‑time capital requests, 18 proposed positions (18 funded), and assigned fund reserves; the council provided direction and will take a final budget vote at the next meeting.

The Los Banos City Council received an overview of the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget, including general‑fund revenues and expenditures, one‑time capital items, assigned reserves, and proposed staffing additions; councilmembers gave feedback and staff will return for formal budget adoption at the next meeting.

Finance Director Moreno reviewed the city’s fund structure and said general‑fund revenues include property tax, sales tax and charges for services. Moreno highlighted projected operating expenditures of about $27.2 million for the coming year and described one‑time costs that staff proposes paying from reserves — including software, a housing vehicle, police equipment and trail maintenance — totaling roughly $822,000 as noted in the staff presentation.

Staff presented proposed Measure P and enterprise fund budgets and then outlined capital projects in general fund, Measure H, business‑type and internal service funds. The draft budget includes a number of capital projects such as the Mercy Springs water line, wastewater final projects and intersection improvements at Pioneer and Ortigalita. Director Moreno identified $21 million in assigned funds, including $2.5 million proposed for streets and roads, $250,000 for economic development, $500,000 for homelessness, $1 million for parks and $2 million for CalPERS liabilities; she also proposed a formal unallocated general‑fund reserve policy target of 30% (approximately $8.7 million).

Staff presented a package of new personnel requests: in total the packet lists 19 positions and funding for 18, including a Community and Economic Development administrative coordinator, a city engineer, police and fire positions (including battalion chief and additional sworn officers), recreation and maintenance staff, and additional utility maintenance technicians; council members discussed timing and recruitment implications for positions and supported many of the additions as necessary to deliver services.

Public comment on the budget was limited; residents asked questions about a planned restroom at College Greens and about Colorado Ballpark project funding. Staff clarified that $500,000 is budgeted for design work for the Colorado Ballpark project in the coming fiscal year and that larger construction funding would follow in later years. Councilmembers praised staff for producing a balanced budget with reserves and asked staff to continue to refine line items; staff will bring a final budget and appropriation limit resolution to the council for adoption at the next scheduled hearing.

Ending: Council provided feedback and suggested mid‑year review dates; staff will return with an adoption item and a finalized budget ordinance and appropriation resolution at the next meeting.