Redding finance director outlines budget shortfalls; council orders oversight and reporting changes

Greg Robinette, Redding's finance director, told the City Council in a lengthy presentation that the city's biennial budget and 10-year financial plan have been strained by lower-than-expected sales-tax receipts, implementation delays in a new enterprise financial system and several large personnel and benefit cost increases adopted in recent years. "As an accountant, I've always taken my responsibility seriously of questioning myself, questioning my work," Robinette said as he outlined the budget cycle, the 10-year plan and adjustments tied to the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding.

The presentation laid out why the city's 10-year plan begins below the council's 10% reserve policy but projects recovery through the adopted FY26 and FY27 budgets, and described how cash is reconciled from audited statements to the budgetary basis. Robinette also reviewed the Oracle financial system rollout and timeline (financials go-live 07/01/2023; human capital management delayed to 10/13/2024; budget module live 01/01/2025), and said the first audited comprehensive financial report (ACFR) from the new system was delivered on 03/18/2025. He noted that monthly cash reports will begin on 11/18/2025.

Why it matters: Redding's general fund relies heavily on sales tax, and the council must weigh staff and public-safety staffing levels against long-term reserve targets and pension-related liabilities. Robinette emphasized that sales tax forecasting is inherently uncertain and that mid-cycle adjustments have been made repeatedly since 2022 as actuals came in below earlier assumptions.

Key details from the presentation: Robinette said the city received about $18,700,000 in ARPA SLFRF funds in two equal tranches and that ARPA-funded positions (nine positions mentioned) have driven recurring personnel cost considerations once federal funds sunset. He described a history of adjustments to the sales-tax forecast beginning in 2022 after consecutive strong years, noting an approximate $500,000 year-over-year shortfall in one recent year and later monthly shortfalls that reached roughly $600,000 then $1.2 million in sequential months. The finance director also described a long run of budget and reporting changes tied to internal reporting categories (transfers in/out, internal department revenues) and said some schedules will be clarified in future budgets.

Public comment and concerns: More than a dozen residents spoke during public comment, raising questions about the 10-year plan, the treatment of reserve and ARPA funds, raises and MOU-related costs, and calls for more transparent routine reporting. Citizen Mike Quinn told the council, "You don't budget your balance sheet. You don't budget your balance sheet," stressing the need to reconcile balance-sheet items and reserves. Other speakers urged careful oversight before any tax increases and asked for clearer disclosure of salaries, pensions and reserve accounting.

Council response and formal action: After extended discussion and public comment, Councilmember Erin Reznor (Councilmember Reznor) proposed several near-term steps focused on process and oversight. The council voted unanimously, 5-0, to direct staff to bring back proposed structures and materials on: having the finance director present for closed-session MOU negotiations; providing an annual grant-funding report by department; reforming the format of budget workshops; offering a policy overview and basic government-finance orientation for newly elected council members; and developing the scope/structure for a prospective finance oversight/review committee to advise the council on future practice. The vote passed with Councilmember Audette, Councilmember Reznor, Councilmember Lata, Councilmember Munson and Mayor Buns recorded as voting yes. The formal direction to staff requires return reports with suggested structures and schedules rather than immediate policy adoption.

Discussion vs. decision: The presentation and subsequent debate combined substantive budget explanation, requests for additional reporting, and policy-direction votes. The presentation was a discussion and explanation of accounting practices and recent trends; the council took formal action only on the set of process and oversight items to be returned for future action, not on changes to the adopted budget itself.

What remains open: Robinette and public commenters both urged further clarity on how reserve, ARPA and internal transfers were presented in budget documents; several speakers asked for an independent review or third-party audit of the competing reports circulating in the community. The council's unanimous vote requires staff to return with proposals for oversight and revised reporting formats; any formal policy changes, audit engagements or chartering of a permanent review committee would be presented to the council in subsequent agenda items.

Ending: The finance presentation and the packed public-comment period prompted an unusually long council session focused on process and transparency. City staff will return with proposals and materials on the items the council approved, and the council signaled it expects more regular and detailed budget-to-actual reporting in the months ahead.