Miss Fazikas used the public hearing on the proposed FY2026 budget to raise detailed concerns about staffing and the city’s water operations fund, asking the council to explain why an additional IT position is budgeted and why portions of general-fund employee pay are funded from water and waterfront revenue.

“I estimate about 55 city employees in total from various city departments and divisions who received part of their compensation from the waterfront,” Miss Fazikas said, asking the council to show where the water-fund share of department totals is disclosed and why a $279,000 payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) remains unchanged despite past plans to phase it out.

City Manager (Nicholas) responded that transfers from the water fund have long been used to pay for specific functions — for example, water-billing clerks and the portion of public-works activity supporting water construction — and that the aggregate transfer level has not increased in the past six years. He said staff can identify examples of shared labor and defended the current accounting practice as historically consistent.

Miss Fazikas also pressed about public-safety technology: she asked why public-safety cameras were budgeted in the IT department rather than the police budget, asked what the $100,000 investigative equipment reserve would buy, and questioned plans to replace license-plate-reader cameras with the vendor Flock, citing the company’s “record of noncompliance with state privacy laws.” The city did not provide new procurement decisions in response that evening; the public hearing was closed at 6:18 p.m.

Why it matters: The questions focus on how utility funds and internal allocations affect public transparency and how surveillance purchases are categorized and justified in the budget. The council signaled the budget will return to later agenda discussion, while staff said the accounting approach follows longstanding practice.

Next steps: The FY2026 budget ordinance (Ordinance 2025-048) was presented on first reading; council members may revisit staffing and fund-allocation details in subsequent meetings or in the materials accompanying the final budget vote.