Jurupa Valley staff ask council for direction on proposed FY 2025–26 budget as public safety costs rise

City finance staff asked the Jurupa Valley City Council on May 15 to provide direction on the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget after outlining rising public safety costs, three recommended new staff positions and a plan to set aside funds for internal service needs.

The city’s Director of Finance, Susan Paragas, told council members the proposed general fund operating revenues total about $63.5 million while operating expenditures are just under $63.4 million, producing a modest operating surplus of roughly $82,000. When one-time capital and other nonrecurring items of about $2.2 million are included, Paragas said the budget shows a net deficit of about $2.15 million for the year but leaves the city with an estimated fund balance of nearly $44.3 million on June 30, 2026.

Paragas said the largest near-term cost increases are in public safety. “One of the major expenses that have increased is our public safety costs. The sheriff's cost increased about $3,200,000 for next year,” she said, attributing the change to negotiated pay raises at the county level and to local program additions. The draft budget assumes an added deputy for a recently approved mobile food vendor enforcement program (about $440,000) and an added sergeant cost that Riverside County will now require each city to pay (about $325,000). In addition, the city is budgeting the full-year cost for Fire Station 18 after paying only half a year in the prior budget.

To respond to workload and program needs the budget proposes three new full-time positions: an emergency services coordinator in the city manager’s office, a management aide split 50/50 between economic development and housing, and a senior planner in community development. Paragas said three existing positions are proposed for reclassification and that staff offsets (consulting reductions, elimination of an interim finance position) would largely mitigate added costs, producing a net personnel savings of about $116,000 when additions and reductions are combined.

Paragas also said staff recommends establishing an internal services facility-improvements fund and setting aside roughly $1.885 million from unassigned general fund balance to seed internal service reserves for facility improvements, fleet management and IT, with options for either fixed allocations (option A) or a pooled 25%-of-surplus approach (option B) to be funded only when there is a general fund surplus.

City Manager Rod (City Manager) said special revenue funds — including development impact fees (DIF), ARPA and other restricted sources — are expected to show roughly $9.9 million in excess next year but noted most of those funds are earmarked for capital improvement projects that will be presented to council separately with the CIP schedule.

Resident and public-sector budget professional Zoeva Ruiz urged greater clarity and transparency. “Without a city manager’s narrative, how can informed decisions truly be made?” Ruiz told the council during public comment, adding that the budget document lacks explanation for whether the column marked “current” reflects adopted, amended or projected totals and that housing-related funding shows a large increase tied mainly to consulting.

Council members questioned details throughout the presentation, asking for itemized breakdowns of the sheriff contract, a clearer mapping of capital improvement funding sources, and line-by-line detail for consulting contracts that were moved between planning and the new housing division. Staff agreed to provide additional spreadsheets and to return with more detailed slides before adoption.

City staff requested that council provide direction on whether to keep a proposed “top of range” performance-based compensation item in the budget; Paragas said it would only be included if council specifically approved it when the budget returns.

The council did not adopt the budget on May 15. Staff said they will return with revised materials and recommended that council consider adopting at a special meeting on June 26; council members asked for the revised budget and answers to questions at least two weeks in advance of any adoption vote.

Looking ahead, Paragas said the city will present a separate capital improvement program (CIP) budget — which draws on restricted funds such as gas tax, Measure A, DIF and federal grants — to the planning commission and then to council in June or July for approval.