Shelbyville council weighs $2 million budget gap; approves staff hires, vehicles and capital items

City Manager Scott Collins told the Shelbyville Mayor and City Council at a June budget review work session that the city faces roughly a $2.0 million shortfall in the draft fiscal plan and asked the council for direction on which cuts or revenue moves to pursue.

Collins said the revised “version 2” budget — produced after recent council guidance — raised the projected ending general fund balance for FY2026 to about $11.8 million, but left an operating gap the council must address. Collins told members they could balance the budget by cutting most 2026 capital projects, pausing proposed new positions or drawing on reserve funds, and warned that doing so would be painful for services and staffing.

The discussion focused on a handful of recurring policy choices: whether to fund a new GIS technician and a single IT support position, whether to proceed with multiple vehicle replacements for public safety, how much to hold back for the Riverview District and flood‑pump projects, and whether to fund a $600,000 local match for a roughly $6 million airport project. Collins also presented an Austin Peay contract estimate for GIS services over five years and said the estimate would cost roughly $848,000 if the council chose an outside vendor rather than a city hire.

Why it matters: the council approved specific personnel and capital items during the work session while also setting pay and general policy priorities that will affect the final adopted budget. Several of the city’s large ongoing projects — notably the flood pumps and Riverview street and parking work — have already reduced fund balances in recent years, and council members repeatedly expressed concern about preserving capacity to pay for major projects without borrowing.

Key decisions and votes

- Personnel: The council approved funding for a GIS technician (position budgeted at $84,500) and a police‑department dispatcher position; the council agreed not to add a second IT support position this year. These personnel approvals were taken individually by voice/hand vote and recorded as accepted by the majority present.

- Public safety vehicles: Council approved the purchase of three pursuit‑rated police SUVs to rotate into the fleet; the council indicated the older vehicles will be surplused.

- Capital and equipment: Council members approved a list of capital purchases and facility items that were highlighted in the version 2 packet. Items the council approved by voice or hand vote included cemetery paving ($40,000), an automatic gate for a cemetery entrance ($15,000), extended camera coverage ($20,000), roll‑off dumpsters for solid waste (4 units), a stormwater pipe‑inspection camera package, a GVWR equipment trailer, airport pickup truck replacement ($45,000), rec‑center fitness equipment ($20,000), HPA sink/kennel system for animal control ($13,000), turf/park mowers, and an air‑conditioning refrigerant recovery unit. The council approved the purchases as presented in the packet unless otherwise noted.

- Employee pay: After deliberation, the council voted on a pay recommendation. The meeting record shows an initial split among members over 3% vs. 4% proposals; the mayor cast a tie‑breaking vote in favor of a 4% across‑the‑board raise for employees.

Discussion highlights and constraints

- Reserves and recent draws: Treasurer Kate Parker and Collins reviewed the recent multi‑year draws on the general fund balance, pointing to several large items that reduced reserves — land purchased for the airport, additional sworn officers, legal fees tied to litigation, and multiple flood‑pump and Riverview District outlays. Collins and Parker urged the council to view the general fund, capital projects fund and state street aid fund together when deciding transfers and priorities.

- Flood pumps and timing: Council members and staff said the flood‑pump project has already incurred preliminary engineering and partial payment obligations (including a recorded 15% payment to the pump manufacturer and other consultant payments). Staff cautioned the council that installation timing is weather‑dependent and that rehabilitation and construction costs remain unknown until bid documents are finalized.

- GIS staffing vs. outsourcing: Staff presented both a city‑hiring path (a GIS technician) and an outside‑services estimate (Austin Peay) for mapping and asset management. Collins noted the Austin Peay estimate of roughly $848,000 over five years and recommended the council weigh cost savings from an in‑house hire versus a multi‑year contract.

- Drone and training: The council debated purchasing a drone and related training/insurance. Insurance agent Brett Fisher told the council the city’s policy could cover a drone for a modest additional premium and that several departments — fire, police, public works, building — could use it for inspections, incident response and mapping. Council members generally favored postponing a purchase of some items until the following year to reduce this year’s budget pressure.

Items left for final adoption

Council members instructed staff to prepare a final budget packet reflecting the changes directed at the work session, with: the approved personnel and capital items included; the mayor’s tie‑breaking 4% raise direction; the version 2 revenue and expenditure estimates; and notes showing where the council asked staff to return with options (for example, deeper cuts to capital if the council wants a balanced budget without using reserves). Staff said the final budget must be published 10 days before the next vote on adoption and that the formal adoption will occur at a later business meeting.

Ending: Council members agreed to send the revised packet to staff for final edits and to meet again on the published schedule for a formal adoption vote. The meeting concluded after roughly an hour and 20 minutes of budget review and line‑item votes.