Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews year-to-date budget, proposes no 1% property-tax increase and recommends 3.25% COLA for admin staff
Summary
At a workshop the council heard a budget snapshot, heard staff propose forgoing the 1% allowed property-tax increase, and reviewed administrative salary steps and a 3.25% cost-of-living recommendation for non-union staff.
City staff presented a year-to-date budget snapshot and several personnel proposals during a workshop session of the Oct. 20 Woodland City Council meeting.
Finance and administrative staff said year-to-date general-fund revenues stood at about $6 million against a full-year budget of $8 million; property-tax receipts were reported at 95% of expected timing because large tax payments arrive with the county treasurer in November. On the expenditure side staff reported roughly $2.6 million spent against an $8.4 million general-fund budget and described several transfers between funds that remain to be posted.
Staff highlighted the impact of capital work on utility funds: water showed a $4.2 million variance driven primarily by the recently completed Reservoir 4 project and associated reimbursements; sewer remains unfavorable to budget because several capital projects are still in engineering. Staff reiterated that impact-fee revenues are being held for strategic capital projects rather than routine repairs.
On property-tax policy, Mayor (name not specified) proposed again that the council forgo the 1% maximum statutory property-tax increase for 2026. “I’m proposing again this year that we would forego the 1% increase and live within our means and not ask residents to pay more on their property taxes,” the mayor said; several council members voiced agreement.
City staff also presented an administrative salary schedule for 2026. The proposed changes included eliminating several now-vacant positions in the administrative roster (city administrator, clerk-treasurer, deputy clerk-treasurer, building official, associate planner, and a lieutenant position in police). Staff recommended moving incumbent administrative positions up a step in their pay range (public works director, police chief, city clerk, city treasurer) and applying a 3.25% cost-of-living adjustment consistent with union contracts.
Council discussed the police department’s staffing plans and the cost implications of adding a lieutenant; staff said adding a lieutenant could substantially increase the police budget and that the position will remain vacant until council decides on funding. Staff also confirmed the city currently fully funds a school resource officer position.
Ending: Staff will incorporate council guidance into upcoming budget documents; formal budget deliberations and ordinance proposals follow the city budget calendar.
