Idaho Falls council reviews balanced-budget proposal and year-round budgeting changes

Mayor and city finance staff told the Idaho Falls City Council on Tuesday that the proposed 2025–26 budget is the product of a year‑round process intended to make the city’s budgeting more deliberate and more transparent.

“We’re gonna call our, first budget Tuesday, session to order,” the mayor said, opening the session that staff said was the latest step in a budgeting rhythm that now includes a February council retreat, department reviews in March and a full budget workshop in April.

Brooks, the city’s assistant finance manager, told the council that “for fiscal year 25 through the month of May, we have, a 184,000,000 of our budget has been received and accounted for in the account system. That is 59%.” Brooks said that the timing of major tax and grant deposits means some month‑to‑month comparisons look low but that collections were in line with expectations ahead of the large July property tax deposit.

Pam, who led the finance presentation, said the city had just completed a positive audit and that finance had circulated a draft budget book to directors and council members; staff said a corrected and more fully formatted version would be posted after additional cleanup.

Nut graf: The presentation outlined both recurring revenue expectations and one‑time resources staff propose to use to smooth the year, while flagging timing risks — chiefly grants, bond proceeds and impact‑fee receipts — that could change the near‑term cash picture. Councilors and directors repeatedly stressed the difference between one‑time funding and recurring base revenue.

Staff described the path the budget took to reach a tentative balance: departments prepared line‑item budgets in May, finance reconciled grants and transfers, and directors and the mayor negotiated reductions to bring general‑fund increases closer to an approximate 5% target. Brooks said the city had about $23 million more collected than expended year‑to‑date across funds and that the general fund had collected roughly $76 million against a $73 million forecast, leaving visible but manageable timing differences.

The package includes: ongoing personnel and operating assumptions described elsewhere in the meeting; roughly $3 million of ERP implementation capacity carried forward into the new year; an estimated $750,000 in one‑time requests funded from annexation/growth receipts (several items already contracted or completed, including a parking lot expansion and fire records management work); and capital borrowing expected for the airport terminal project (estimated at $17 million).

Council and staff also discussed how the budget book now shows an “estimated beginning fund balance” and a set‑aside of reserves and contingencies. Pam said most of the beginning balances are committed to specified uses — capital projects, debt service or rate stabilization — and asked councilors to treat those numbers as constrained resources, not free cash.

Ending: Finance told the council the budget will move through the standard cycle — tentative adoption this month, formal adoption in August, formal submission to the state in September — with audit preparation following in October and January. Councilors scheduled more detailed departmental Q&A for the next budget Tuesday session.