Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee deadlocks on $47,000 transfer for shared business development director
Summary
The Marshfield Finance, Budget and Personnel Committee voted 2-2 on Jan. 2, 2025, and failed to approve Budget Resolution 01-2025, which would have moved $47,000 from general fund contingency to Fund 205 for cost-sharing of a business development director position with Mackey.
The Marshfield Finance, Budget and Personnel Committee on Jan. 2, 2025, failed on a 2-2 vote to approve Budget Resolution 01-2025 to transfer $47,000 from the city’s general fund contingency to Fund 205 (economic development) to cover a city share of a business development director position with Mackey.
City Administrator Steve Barrack described the transfer as a technical step to commit money now so Mackey would feel comfortable recruiting for the position. "They really wanted to know before they went out and started recruiting someone for that position that the city was going to be supportive of continuing that partnership," Barrack said, noting the council had budgeted the amount in contingency and that the requested transfer would allow the city to pay a prorated share of wages and benefits when the hire started.
Council member Spyros opposed the transfer, saying she wanted the council to review any funding when the position was actually filled. "I'm actually not gonna support this, and I'm gonna explain why," Spyros said. She raised concerns about possible duplication of services if the city and the municipal utility each hired similar positions and about timing: "I wanted that ability when somebody was actually hired for that to be brought to the council at that point in time and for us to discuss it at that point in time."
Council member Bridal also questioned whether moving the money to Fund 205 would address Mackey’s concern. "I don't really see this solving anything," Bridal said, adding that the transfer would not guarantee longer-term funding beyond 2025.
The motion to transfer $47,000 was made by Council member Kran and seconded by Council member Marshall. When the committee voted, Kran and Marshall voted yes and Spyros and Bridal voted no; the chair announced the motion failed 2 to 2.
Barrack said the transfer was intended to be prorated if the hire occurred partway through the year and that Mackey’s request stemmed from concern that a lower voting threshold at a future meeting could leave the organization unable to rely on the city share when it went to recruit. He also said the transfer would not commit the council to funding beyond 2025.
The committee took no further action on the item after the failed vote.
