Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Aquarium Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Jenks Aquarium Authority approves conservative budget despite higher attendance and revenue

3378497 · May 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Jenks — The Jenks Aquarium Authority on Monday reviewed proposed changes to its FY2024–26 budget and voted to recommend the package to the appropriate governing body, even as trustees questioned conservative revenue forecasts that trail recent actual receipts.

Jenks — The Jenks Aquarium Authority on Monday reviewed proposed changes to its FY2024–26 budget and voted to recommend the package to the appropriate governing body, even as trustees questioned conservative revenue forecasts that trail recent actual receipts.

Staff said the aquarium’s operating-revenue forecast for the coming years was conservative — showing operating receipts of roughly $8.2 million for the first year and $8.4 million for the second — while actuals for the most recent fiscal year were higher and likely to be north of $8.5 million. Trustees asked whether a higher operating forecast (for example, $8.7–9.0 million) would be more realistic given recent performance and seasonal strength in the final fiscal quarter.

Financing and reserves The aquarium budget packet shows operating expenditures, capital items and transfers. Staff identified a planned transfer from a capital/reserve account (referred to in the packet as fund 93) to fund operations in the coming year; staff characterized that transfer as available but said they do not plan to use it unless operating receipts fall short and that fund 59 was another potential operating backstop if needed. The authority and staff noted that maintaining clear operating and capital fund balances reduces the risk of midyear borrowing or unplanned appropriations.

Capital and maintenance questions Trustees raised deferred-maintenance concerns (roof, HVAC and filtration systems) and asked staff to confirm the timing and expected costs for major replacements. Staff said the roof can likely be deferred a few years but that large capital replacements are scheduled in a multi-year plan; staff also explained that portions of some staff costs (exhibit-team personnel) are capitalized when they work on capital projects and therefore appear in the capital section of the packet.

Other items Trustees asked about staffing levels, fill rates for open positions and whether the new quarantine/research facility would increase annual utility and maintenance costs; staff said those questions will be factored into next year’s detailed budget as timing of the new facility becomes clearer.

Transparency suggestion One trustee asked staff to show the percentage of the fiscal year completed alongside actual-to-date figures (for example, “75% of fiscal year complete; actual receipts 89% of budget”) to make it easier for the public and nonfinancial audiences to interpret midyear performance.

Vote After discussion the authority voted to recommend the proposed budget. Vote on the recommendation: John Brown, yes; Keith Montgomery, yes; Mayor Box, yes.

Ending Staff said they would provide trustees with more detailed departmental personnel and maintenance schedules on request and expected to refine revenue forecasts ahead of the public budget hearing.