Green River reviews tentative budget; staff to refine lines for EMS, water projects and grants

Green River City Council held a special budget workshop on April 29, 2025, to review year-to-date revenues and expenditures and identify line-item adjustments to prepare for the tentative budget public hearing and the June final adoption. City staff summarized revenues as near projection and said total expenditures remain well below the year-to-date budget, while certain specific accounts—such as training, administrative lines and some capital accounting lines—require reconciliation.

The presentation said total revenue in the general fund was at roughly 98.94% of the expected amount for the fiscal point reviewed and that the fiscal year was 83.3333% complete. Edward, a city staff member who ran the presentation, told the council: “So today, we are 83.3333% of the fiscal year complete.” He highlighted that although several individual expense lines are over their year-to-date percentage, aggregated city spending across funds was at about 61.24% year to date.

Why it matters: council members used the workshop to identify accounting fixes and policy choices that would affect the tentative budget — notably how the city records and spends donations tied to fire and emergency medical services (EMS), how transient-room-tax (TRT) changes at the county and state levels could affect local revenues, and how bond and project accounting for an ongoing large water capital project should be displayed in budget documents.

Key points from staff and council discussion

- EMS and fire donations: Staff said the city currently records donated funds through the general fund and then pays EMS-related expenditures out of various general fund lines because there is not yet a dedicated EMS or fire donations line. Councilmembers and staff agreed creating dedicated budget lines for fire and EMS donations and expenditures would improve auditability and make earmarked gifts easier to track and spend for their intended purposes.

- General fund and account colors: Staff explained the budget report uses color coding tied to percent-of-year‑used (83.3333% = benchmark). Lines colored green indicate revenue at or above year-to-date percent; orange indicates expense lines at or above that percent. Several individual lines were over their expected percent, but aggregate spending remained well under budget.

- TRT (resort/transient room tax) and county distribution: Staff and council discussed recent legislative changes that will shift additional TRT revenue to the county and state, reducing the pool of locally controlled TRT dollars. Councilmembers said Green River still generates the lion’s share of county TRT revenue and that the city should pursue specific, project‑based requests to the county to reclaim funds for local infrastructure (curb, gutter and downtown improvements) rather than a general request. The presentation noted the county’s return to the city is not automatic and depends on county priorities and any specific plans the city can present.

- RAP/recreation tax use: Council discussed how RAP tax (the local recreation tax passed by voters) had been reallocated over time from an original list of voter-intended projects to daily maintenance and smaller items. Staff said the RAP tax rate is 4% and that the council can choose to reassign which costs are paid from RAP versus general funds (for example, keeping day-to-day park maintenance in the general fund and reserving RAP for larger capital projects).

- Water and sewer capital accounting: Staff said a large water capital project is underway and emphasized that one line in the printed budget appears to show an apparent overspend (more than $5 million) because bond-funded project accounting was reported in a project/work-in-process section that does not migrate cleanly into the same line-item display. Staff said auditors and the finance system require some project-specific accounting that makes the printed line look misleading until reconciled.

- Street lights/bridge lights: Staff reported bridge street lights had been off for several days due to a needed relay/cutoff installation and that new photovoltaic lights are scheduled for installation within 24–48 hours. Rocky Mountain (power) was engaged to flip power and contractors were working on the shutoff device to enable the new fixtures.

- Museum and event revenue: The museum’s earned income was low compared with prior years, and development/grant income (noted by staff) is helping offset that shortfall. Staff identified $73,000 in incoming development income to the museum line (approximately $30,000 from a nonprofit, about $3,000 from a state grant final payment and $40,000 from county support) that will be recognized before the fiscal year end.

- Recreation (youth sports) funding: Staff described carryover and earmarked amounts for youth sports programs (for example, volleyball funds that were not used when a summer camp did not run). Council asked staff to place a discussion about using rec funds to support a trial softball registration model on a future agenda; staff said the city could move some existing rec funds to support pilot programming.

- Payroll coding and internal charges: Council discussed the city’s current payroll‑allocation method that applies static percentages across funds for public‑works staff. Staff said the percentages were originally generated from timecard analysis, but some councilmembers favored coding work to the actual functions (cemetery, lights, park maintenance) for clearer year-to-year trends, recognizing that more detailed coding increases administrative work.

- Health insurance renewal: Staff presented renewal quotes and recommended options. SelectHealth renewal quoted a 16.13% increase; PEHP quotes were slightly higher. Staff reported a supplemental vision plan was available at about $81 per month per employee. Council directed staff to survey employees quickly about out-of-area provider use (for example, lab and specialist patterns tied to Grand Junction) because a timely decision is required: the city must decide on renewal within approximately the first two weeks of May to accommodate coverage changes and employee enrollment timing.

- AirBuild lease and carbon-capture project: Staff reported AirBuild — which had lost full project funding for a larger facility — requested a short-term, reduced-size lease of roughly a half‑acre at the previously discussed industrial site so it can start a smaller initial build and qualify for carbon‑credit contracts. Staff proposed a one‑year lease at a nominal dollar amount (staff suggested $1) and asked the council to authorize staff to draft a revised short-term lease that preserves site cleanup and dilapidation protections. Councilmembers indicated support for a short-term lease contingent on standard lease conditions.

- Federal grant and planning work: The city is participating in a USDOT “Thriving Communities”/SS4A (Safe Streets and Roads for All) work stream and expects to submit an SS4A grant application in the coming weeks (staff noted a June 16 deadline for a related item) to support sidewalk, curb and safety projects identified in the needs assessment.

Council direction and next steps

Council did not adopt any budget ordinance at the workshop. Instead, the council directed staff to: create clearer lines for fire/EMS donations and expenditures; reconcile project/bond accounting for the water and sewer capital projects so printed budget pages reflect true project balances; prepare a short-term lease to accommodate AirBuild’s initial build and carbon-credit contract timing; survey employees about health‑care provider usage to inform the insurance renewal decision; and prepare revised budget documents ahead of the tentative budget public hearing.

The meeting closed with a motion to adjourn, which was seconded and approved by voice vote.