Commission reviews FY26 budget; freight house electrification and tuckpointing compete for limited funds

Vosha Gerlach, the city’s new chief financial officer, reviewed the Riverfront Improvement Commission’s draft fiscal year 2026 operating and capital budgets and said salaries and benefits rose 15.75 percent compared with FY25 due largely to prior reclassification for exempt staff.

Gerlach said staff proposed transferring $50,000 from the commission’s fund balance to make up half of a proposed $100,000 freight‑house electrical upgrade, arguing the upgrade would improve the building’s marketability. Gerlach said the commission’s available fund balance was “just over $200,000” and that using the $50,000 would reduce the balance.

Commissioners raised objections and asked for clarity on priorities. They noted the freight house has multiple deferred‑maintenance needs (masonry/tuckpointing estimated at $330,000 in FY26 and an awning replacement in FY27) and that some funds in the commission account were previously reserved by a resolution for capital projects. Commissioners asked facilities staff to re-evaluate whether tuckpointing could be phased or scaled back so electrical upgrades could proceed without drawing down the fund balance.

Staff reported revenue assumptions also contain uncertainties: a vacant diner space in the freight house and other tenants could reduce FY26 rental revenue projections. The draft shows a roughly $30,000 use of fund balance to cover the proposed capital plan if the freight‑house electrical project proceeds as proposed.

Why it matters: The commission’s fund balance was intended for capital improvements; commissioners asked that staff present alternative phasing and priority options before approving transfers that would reduce the capital reserve. Several commissioners emphasized they want facilities to reassess the scope and timing of tuckpointing, electrical upgrades and awning replacement to identify options that preserve reserves while addressing building rentability.

Next steps: Staff agreed to provide a list of FY26 capital items and to ask facilities to reevaluate whether the masonry/tuckpointing schedule can be adjusted and whether electrical upgrades can be phased to reduce immediate fund-balance impact. The commission also asked staff to model revenue scenarios reflecting a vacant diner and lower rental receipts.

Ending: No final capital decision was made at the meeting; commissioners directed staff to return with revised phasing and funding options and clarified that any reallocation from the commission’s reserved funds should be presented with alternatives for approval.