Council questions use of performance contracts, seeks clearer budget reporting
Summary
Councilors pressed staff about a $50,000 performance contract and why no budget amendment was listed; staff said funds would come from a prior performance-contract line and general-fund contingency and offered to draft an amendment on how performance contracts are reflected in the budget.
Council members questioned how the city funds performance contracts and whether the practice should be more transparent in the budget.
A council member (Speaker 2) noted there was "no budget amendment still on this agenda today for this item" and asked that a budget amendment be added if money is being moved between accounts to fund a performance contract. Administration (Speaker 8) replied the $50,000 performance contract is being funded from an existing performance-contract line and general-fund contingency, and said "it's all being done within the general fund."
City staff (Speaker 3) emphasized that transfers are initiated by the mayor's office and that funding must be certified by the finance director and approved by council before expenditure. Speaker 3 said they would prepare an amendment allowing council members the option not to vote on performance contracts if there is a preference to change the process.
Councilman Woods (Speaker 4), who chairs finance, supported greater transparency and asked for reporting requirements in future performance contracts so the council and public can see tangible results. Woods asked to meet with the finance department to develop clearer procedures for capital transfers and performance-contract oversight.
The transcript does not record a vote or final policy change on how performance contracts are budgeted; council members asked staff to draft potential amendments and to convene meetings to improve process and reporting.
