Scranton officials present 2026 budget with no tax increase and new single-millage proposal

Scranton City Council · November 14, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City presenters told council the proposed 2026 budget holds the line on taxes, shifts to a single real-estate millage pending county reassessment, budgets $115 million in revenue, and funds technology, public-safety capital and several new positions.

City presenters outlined a proposed 2026 operating budget that includes no property-tax increase and no tax-and-revenue anticipation note for a third straight year, while moving to a single real-estate millage contingent on a county reassessment.

Presenter (identified in the meeting as Speaker 2) told the council the administration is preparing the budget assuming the county will certify a new assessment and that the change from split millage to a single millage is designed to be revenue-neutral in the reassessment year. "There is no tax increase included in this year's budget, and there's no TRAN included in the budget," the presenter said. Staff estimated the adjusted millage would be roughly 6.0439 in 2026 if the reassessment is applied.

The budget document lays out $115 million in revenue for 2026, about $2.3 million higher than the 2025 operating budget. Key revenue drivers the presenters cited include a projected rise in earned-income tax receipts (budgeted at $37.4 million for 2026, up from $36.1 million in 2025) and stronger interest earnings (staff budgeted $945,000 for interest income after $703,000 posted through September 2025).

Officials also described specific fee and tax-line items: the city trash fee will remain $300; real-estate transfer tax was budgeted at $6.2 million; and payroll-prep collections were budgeted at $2.8 million for current revenues with $530,000 for delinquent receipts.

On the expenditure side, staff said they will transfer $2.3 million from operating into a capital reserve fund and that public-safety operating budgets will rise — about 6% for police and 4% for fire — with capital outlays of approximately $1.5 million for police and $2.4 million for fire. The administration said it does not anticipate new borrowing for 2026 and expects debt-service to increase only minimally.

Technology and efficiency investments were prominent in the presentation. The administration described a citywide Esri/GIS deployment to combine 311 routing, pothole reporting, basin tracking (for MS4 stormwater reporting), pavement mapping and a capital-budget tracker. Staff said the project was originally funded from ARPA in 2024 and that the GIS platform will be used to route 311 calls and map work for multiple departments. "Once the new assessment is applied, our millage will actually be 6.0439 in 2026," the presenter said, and later described Esri as enabling better tracking of infrastructure and project timelines.

Staff requested several position changes tied to those projects and operations: a project manager with GIS skills to manage the Esri rollout and related work flows; a confidential secretary for code enforcement; an additional highways supervisor in DPW; a parks manager for NAUG Park and another pool operator for new pools; and converting a part-time facilities role to full time. Presenters said the additional positions are funded from stronger-than-expected revenues (not from a tax increase) and from savings in some expense lines.

Treasury and administrative presenters also described accounting clarifications: postage and Portnoff fees that were previously netted from revenue will be shown as expenditures going forward to provide a truer picture of delinquent-refuse receipts. The administration estimates contingency at roughly $650,000 for the year.

Council members pressed staff on several items, including the total personnel cost of new positions, the original and supplemental costs for the Esri purchase, and the expected variability in pave-cut revenues and third-party contractor costs. Staff said Esri's total acquisition was covered with ARPA funds and supplemental purchases; they also said the city aligned pave-cut pricing with PennDOT specifications after prior litigation over an ordinance.

The presentation concluded with a reminder that certain figures remain contingent on the county assessment certification and FEMA grant reimbursement timing; staff said they will adjust if necessary once the county finalizes the reassessment.