Elmhurst aldermen reject late line-item cuts, move budget package forward with $3.6M in staff and council reductions

Elmhurst’s Committee of the Whole on Nov. 17 reviewed the proposed 2026 budget and voted down multiple late amendments to trim small line items, leaving the package with about $3,600,000 in staff and council reductions to be presented to the full council and to a public hearing on the tax levy.

Mayor opened the meeting and framed the budget challenge, saying the city had drawn down COVID-era reserves and faced rising costs in health insurance and other lines. “Our proposed budget... had $3,000,000 in cuts through work of the council. We added another $600,000 in deferrals,” the mayor said, adding the changes had been designed to keep reserves in the city’s 25–33% policy range. He noted the package would result in about a $56 increase on an average $500,000 home under the levy scenario being discussed.

Chair Taluto summarized staff work and council adjustments, telling members that staff’s ground-up budget originally totaled about $80.4 million for general fund expenses and that “Dollars 3,600,000.0 has already been cut out of the budget that was originally proposed,” leaving a proposed general fund total near $76.8 million.

Alderman Hill moved to strike a bundle of green color‑coded items from the proposed additional general fund reductions — a package totaling roughly $164,000 that included the commissioner recognition event ($23,000), professional photography ($20,000), promotional campaigns ($20,000), social media marketing ($10,000), deferral of the sustainability plan update ($50,000), and several small parks or facilities items. Alderman Virgil seconded the motion and argued the council should pursue additional cuts now. “We’ve got a structural budget issue,” Virgil said, urging early action to reduce future adjustments.

Opponents said the proposed cuts were largely one‑time deferrals or small quality‑of‑life expenses and that cutting them would do little to solve the city’s structural deficit while reducing programs residents value. Alderman Nardini argued the commissioner recognition event honors volunteers and opposed eliminating it; others warned deferrals simply delay costs into future years. After debate, the roll call showed the motion failed, 3 ayes to 11 nays.

Separately, a motion to restore forestry line items (two tree‑planting lines totaling $17,500 and $27,500) was made but died for lack of a second. Later, Alderman Virgil proposed cutting $20,000 from the trolley program and $50,000 from community grants; that amendment drew a second and discussion but was defeated in roll call, 4 ayes to 10 nays.

Members emphasized that the Committee of the Whole’s votes were advisory and that the final ordinances would be handled at the regular council meeting and the scheduled levy public hearing. Several aldermen said they expect a deeper, multi‑month review of structural budget issues in 2026. The committee adjourned and the council meeting followed.

What’s next: the levy ordinance and a public hearing are scheduled for Dec. 1; aldermen indicated they will consider a separate council motion to restore senior services line items at that meeting if they so choose.