Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Orangeville public hearing identifies $183,005 shortfall; councilors review cuts, EMS request
Summary
At a public hearing on the proposed budget, city staff outlined a $183,005 general-fund deficit, a proposed 2% cost-of-living adjustment and several potential cuts. Council members discussed trimming conferences, capital outlays and events and deferred a vote until a future meeting.
Orangeville held a public hearing on the city’s proposed budget in which staff said the general fund is projected to be short by $183,005.50 and recommended a series of cuts and priorities to close the gap.
Gary, a city staff member presenting the budget, told councilors that “the general fund budget does not balance because expenditures exceeding the revenues by a hundred and $83,005.50.” He said the draft budget includes a 2% cost-of-living adjustment for full-time employees and a proposal to move one employee from part time to full time that would add about $50,000 in compensation and benefits to the budget.
The shortfall and proposed changes matter because most of the city’s discretionary revenue—property tax, sales tax and municipal energy tax—is limited and the city has little in reserve, the presenter said. He explained that some spending areas (Class C road funds and grants, including the planned pickleball courts) are restricted by funding source and would not be covered by the general fund.
In the hearing, council members and staff reviewed specific line items as possible reductions. Proposed cuts or reductions discussed included trimming conference attendance (send fewer people or use online options), lowering capital outlay for an administrative vehicle and permanent lights at City Hall/community center, reducing beautification/cleanup and central-purchasing supplies, and deferring some parking-lot and facility repairs. Gary walked the group through department-level line items and recommended specific reductions to test whether the numbers could balance.
Staff provided several cost details during the presentation: the part-time-to-full-time change was estimated at about $50,000, broken into roughly $32,000 for health insurance and about $18,000 for URS retirement contributions; the COLA is 2% for eligible employees; administrative capital outlay included $25,000 for a vehicle, $5,000 for permanent lights and $800 for office scanners; road-related capital (to be paid from Class C funds) included a $15,000 salt spreader and $243,994 carried over for curb, gutter and sidewalks if other items were spent.
Council members also discussed program and festival expenditures and revenue strategies. Staff recommended asking the county to include the city on Transient Room Tax (TRT) allocations and said the city will apply for that distribution. For city celebrations, staff suggested shifting some costs to donations or voluntary payments at events and reducing city-paid food and catering.
Public-safety and service items arose in discussion. The county asked the city to contribute about $6,000 toward EMS; councilors debated which department should carry that line (fire or another emergency-services account) and whether some of that amount could be reduced. The presenters noted that county EMS finances include state EMS grant revenue and that those numbers could affect local contributions; staff offered to review county financial statements and follow up.
Animal control and the use of an existing building were also raised: staff said the county pays roughly $45,000 now to send animals to a private provider (Emory Animal Health) and suggested assessing whether housing animals locally and contracting with neighboring jurisdictions might be cost-effective.
Because the council did not have a full quorum for final action, members made and passed procedural motions to open and then close the public hearing but did not adopt a final budget or resolution. Tracy moved to close the public hearing and Carrie seconded; the motion passed by voice vote. Staff said the resolution to adopt the budget will be brought for a vote at a subsequent meeting after councilors review additional adjustments.
The hearing featured detailed line-item discussion but produced no final appropriations; staff and councilors agreed to return with adjusted numbers and follow-up analysis on EMS, animal control options, and potential grant opportunities for fire equipment and park improvements.
