El Centro council adopts $162.46 million fiscal 2025–26 budget after presentation and debate

The El Centro City Council voted to adopt a $162,458,817 spending plan for fiscal year 2025–26 after a presentation by Andy Heath, a financial consultant to the city, and more than an hour of council questions and comments.

Heath told the council the proposed budget – which the presentation groups as citywide appropriations across 90 funds – reflects carryovers from current projects, planned capital work, and a conservative forecast of revenues and costs. “What I’ll be doing tonight is actually giving you a presentation on the upcoming year, fiscal year, which begins July 1,” Heath said during his presentation.

The council’s approval follows detailed line-item and fund-level forecasts brought forward in recent months, Heath said, and includes a $2 million ongoing placeholder intended to address results from a citywide compensation study. That placeholder is part of the general fund proposal of about $49.6 million. Capital appropriations in the plan total just under $52 million, with notable projects and carryovers that include police station funding, ADA improvements and parks projects.

Why it matters: the budget sets spending authority for the coming fiscal year and establishes citywide staffing and capital priorities. Heath said the plan balances the use of one-time funds and recurring revenues and keeps reserve balances robust under the assumptions in the presentation.

Key details from the presentation and council discussion: - Citywide appropriation request: $162,458,817. Heath said about five funds (the general fund, Measure P and three enterprise funds) comprise roughly 61 percent of that total. - General fund: a $49.6 million appropriations plan that includes a $2,000,000 placeholder for compensation adjustments tied to a pending compensation survey; an anticipated small surplus of about $2,017,662 before the placeholder; and built-in vacancy-savings assumptions. - Capital: just under $52 million budgeted citywide. Specific projects cited included ADA improvements (~$1.7 million), Valley Point Center carryovers (~$3.5 million), police station budget items and park improvements such as Gomez Park (Prop. 68 funding noted). - Measure P: forecasted revenue for the fund is roughly $8 million annually, with the proposed 2025–26 package showing about a $15 million appropriation and an expected fund balance at year-end of roughly $6.5 million if all budgeted amounts are spent. - One-time transfers and internal-service adjustments: Heath proposed a onetime transfer of about $6.2 million from overfunded internal service funds back to operating funds (general, water, wastewater) and noted $310,000 and $200,000 transfers tied to OPEB/retiree-health trusts. - Staffing: the proposal converts 17 long-running temporary positions to full time and adds nine positions (five new, four reclassifications) across departments, at an estimated ongoing cost to the general fund of just under $250,000. The budget also includes funding assumptions that treat positions as filled for the full year with a modest vacancy-savings factor built in.

Council reaction and conditions: during debate several council members voiced concern about approving certain new or reclassified positions before the compensation study is completed. One council member (name not specified in the record) said, “I don’t feel comfortable knowing that at this point that we have not concluded or even begun the compensation study on everybody,” and asked for either additional time to review job descriptions or to hold funds for those positions in abeyance.

Acting City Manager and staff responses: city staff told the council they could adopt the budget as presented and simultaneously hold spending for contested positions until the council returns with further direction. Heath and staff said the budget could still be adjusted after adoption through subsequent council action and quarterly fiscal reports.

Votes and next steps: the council made a motion to adopt the budget as presented and to hold further action on the specific new positions pending additional council review. The motion was seconded and the clerk recorded the motion as passing (transcript notes: “Motion passes 3 0 with 2 notes”; the transcript does not provide a roll-call vote listing individual yes/no votes). The council also continued a separate agenda item (item 5) to July 15.

What’s left unresolved: council members requested job descriptions for several proposed positions (including a senior traffic signal technician, a deputy fire chief reclassification and a police lieutenant reclassification) and urged that final action on those positions await additional review. Heath and staff said the city will present quarterly fiscal reports and continue to refine fund-level balances and forecasts, and CalPERS actuarial updates expected this summer will be incorporated into future forecasts.

Looking ahead: Heath said staff will return with quarterly fiscal reports, continue audits to bring financial statements current, and complete a citywide review of all 90 funds over the coming three to six months to identify additional, permissible uses of fund balances.