Perry council reviews $1.4 million in capital projects, budgets for FY 2025–26; hearing proposed for June 2

Perry — City officials presented a draft FY 2025–26 budget on Thursday that budgets nearly $1.4 million for capital outlays while adopting conservative revenue assumptions and cautious operating estimates.

The draft, presented to the Perry City Council, shoestrings sales-tax projections to 85% of recent peak receipts and builds in utility-rate increases passed in December to help pay for capital needs. Russ Follis, the city’s chief financial officer, said the capital spending is “pretty much a chunk of extra revenue generated from the utility rate increases” and is intended to fund streets, water and treatment-plant upgrades and other one-time investments.

The nut graf: the draft balances a push for catch-up capital work with a priority on reserve levels. Officials propose $1.3–1.4 million in capital outlay, continued transfers from the municipal authority to other city funds, and a fund-balance carryover the administration describes as the city’s “rainy day” money.

Follis told council that the consolidated budget shows an aggregated projected decline of roughly $340,000 across funds before carryover adjustments, but he said he expects the final year-end position to land at or near zero after typical underspending on capital. “I really do anticipate that this budget is what I would consider balanced,” Follis said.

City Manager Nate (no last name specified in the public record) framed the budget process as conservative on revenues and somewhat aggressive on capturing necessary capital upgrades after years of deferred maintenance. He told council the capital allocation includes a roughly $330,000 request for two new dump trucks for the streets division, funding to replace and retrofit public buildings, cemetery equipment, and water and sewer plant debt for treatment and booster-station improvements.

Highlights and context: - Capital outlay: about $1.3–1.4 million, largely from utility transfers tied to recent rate changes; projects include water-treatment upgrades, sludge boxes, a booster station, airport hangars and airport facility improvements, and equipment for parks, cemetery and public safety. - Fund balances: the general fund carryover is projected around $1.9–2.1 million (roughly 90–100 days of operating cash). Officials said their long-term target was closer to $4.0 million (about six months of operating cash). - Transfers: PMA/utility transfers to support general operations and restricted funds remain a large line item in the roll-forward summary; officials cited roughly $3.3 million in transfers from utility operations in the draft. - Budget assumptions: sales-tax collection is budgeted at 85% of recent highs; CPI and fuel assumptions are conservative. The draft anticipates utility revenue increases to fully phase in over the next 12 months.

Capital detail: directors and staff summarized department requests included in the draft. Parks staff asked for funding to complete planned ballpark phase work and to install additional turf areas on infields; cemetery staff requested a replacement truck and ground mats to protect turf during wet conditions; the police department requested a multi-year vehicle rotation and a $50,000 allocation for a station remodel feasibility study; the airport plans to construct four new state-subsidized T-hangars and is budgeting insulation, HVAC and runway preservation work on multi-year timeline.

Officials urged council members to review the full line-item workbooks provided with the packet and noted the budget calendar. The administration proposed setting the public budget hearing for June 2; staff said the hearing and a possible adoption could occur at that meeting if council is ready. The administration also warned that if a formal emergency clause is not used for rate ordinances, the measure would be subject to referendum and requires additional newspaper publication.

Ending: Council members asked for more time to digest the department-level line items and capital lists; the administration said it would schedule follow-up briefings and a staff session to answer line-item questions before the June public hearing. The council did not adopt the budget at the meeting; the hearing was proposed for June 2.