Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.

Williamsport moves Bowman Field income into general fund; council asks whether MLB contributes revenue

Williamsport City Council (budget work session) · November 18, 2025
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

Administration shifted $250,000 of Bowman Field rental income into the general fund as a one-time move; council members questioned historical MLB contributions toward overtime and whether current MLB agreements provide revenue to the city.

Finance staff told council that Bowman Field rental income and legacy balances were moved into the general fund as a one-time revenue adjustment of $250,000. Jamie explained that Bowman Field income had historically been held in a special revenue fund and "we moved it over to the general fund" this year because the revenue should properly be recorded in parks department revenue.

Council members probed whether Major League Baseball (MLB) or the Crosscutters currently pay revenue to the city. Jamie said the current agreement with MLB does not direct revenue to the city; most recent payments are contributions toward groundskeeping and some project work, and any MLB-specific compensation has not been included in the City's revenue projections for 2026. Councilors recalled that historically the city received $75,000 in years when the MLB-hosted game occurred and that those funds had been sequestered into a Bowman Field account; that account balance is now being used for the one-time transfer.

Council members asked that administration clarify the historical revenue flows, any contractual obligations with MLB or teams and whether future negotiations could restore a compensating payment to offset overtime or operating costs. Jamie said the current budget does not include expected MLB revenue and that any future agreement would require separate council discussion.