Annapolis finance director presents FY26 priorities; committee asks for staffing, digitization amendments

Felicia Moran, the city’s finance director, presented the Finance Department’s FY25 results and proposed FY26 priorities to the Annapolis Finance Standing Committee on May 1, 2025.

Moran told the committee she is completing a transition into the role and is proposing one new Accountant II (listed in the budget as the payroll/AP position), continued work to move finance staff to Shaw Street, digitization of paper records ahead of that move, implementation of ACH payments to reduce paper checks and continued rollout of NEOGOV to streamline payroll. She also said the department is proposing issuance of debt for vehicles and capital improvements in FY26 and is recommending continued process improvements and staff cross‑training.

Why it matters: committee members pressed for concrete cost estimates and amendment language before the May 9 amendment deadline. The presentation addressed both recurring staffing needs and one‑time investments tied to the capital program; committee members said more detail is required before they will consider adding positions or enhancements.

Key details from the presentation and committee questioning

- Staffing and organization: Moran said the FY26 package includes one new Accountant II position to cover payroll and accounts payable; she described two currently highlighted positions on the organizational chart that she envisions as managers (rather than deputies) to split technical duties. Moran said the deputy finance position remains open and that filling technical roles has been difficult in recruitment.

- Consultant and transition funding: Moran said the $100,000 consulting line (page 67 of the budget book) includes an additional $50,000 to retain the previous finance director to assist with transition work.

- Digitization and payments: Moran said the department is pursuing digitization of records before moving to Shaw Street, implementation of ACH transactions to reduce about 500 paper checks a month, and continued NEOGOV implementation to streamline payroll.

- Internal audit concept: Moran presented an idea for an internal audit function. She said it would be additional to—not a replacement for—external audit work, and could be implemented as a contracted service rather than a full‑time city employee. Committee members asked for cost estimates and a recommended implementation approach.

- Fund balance, PAYGo and one‑time uses: Committee members pressed Moran and the budget staff to explain why the FY26 proposed budget shows revenues below expenditures in some tables and how the city is using fund balance. Moran and budget staff explained that the apparent shortfall is driven largely by planned one‑time uses of fund balance for capital (PAYGo) and reserves, and that city policy allocates fund balance for 1‑time capital and other nonrecurring items rather than to cover ongoing expenditures.

- Administrative reimbursements: Budget staff said a projected increase in administrative reimbursements in FY26 (from roughly $4 million historically to about $6 million in the proposed budget) is primarily driven by overhead charges included in capital project budgets; if capital projects do not proceed, the number would be lower.

- Community grants: Moran said community grant funding in FY26 declined by $10,000 compared with FY25, but as a share of total requests the committee-funded share rises from 34% to 42% of requests.

- Other clarifications: Moran said the proposed $102,000 UAS (drone) program manager is being funded from one‑time funds as a pilot for police; she clarified that the line labeled as a mayor’s initiative in one chart is actually central services contractual support for the mayor’s office and that staff will follow up with a clearer breakdown. Moran and budget staff said Harbour Master revenue is shown $200,000 lower in FY26 because of a 20% projected reduction tied to a downtown renovation project discussed in the meeting under the label “CityDoc.”

Committee follow‑up and next steps

Committee members asked Moran and Budget Manager Trudeau to return with cost estimates and amendment language for: digitization ahead of the Shaw Street move; potential funding options to create an internal audit capacity (contract vs. position); and a list and cost for any manager/deputy/technical positions the director recommends. The committee noted May 9 as the amendment deadline.

Votes at a glance (formal committee actions recorded during the meeting)

- Motion to approve the agenda as written — approved by voice vote. - Motion to approve minutes from the April 29, 2025 meeting — approved by voice vote. - Motion to recess the finance committee for a short break — approved by voice vote. - Motion to adjourn at the end of the meeting — approved by voice vote.

Ending: The director and budget staff agreed to provide the committee with requested cost details and amendment language before the amendment deadline so the committee can consider any additions to the proposed FY26 budget.