Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the City Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pewaukee finance committee recommends preliminary 2026 budget, proposes modest tax-rate increase

Pewaukee Finance Committee
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

At a finance-committee workshop, staff presented a draft 2026 budget that would raise the tax rate about 4.1% and maintain a fund balance of roughly 25.6% of revenues; the committee recommended the draft to the full council by voice vote while requesting clarifications on several revenue and capital-items line items.

The Pewaukee finance committee voted to recommend the draft 2026 budget to the full council after a workshop where staff outlined a proposed tax levy just under $12.7 million and an estimated 4.1% tax-rate increase, staff said.

The committee heard that the proposed levy represents a 4.24% increase overall, which staff translated to roughly a $33.75 increase on a $250,000 home, and that the budget currently shows a fund balance of about 25.6% of revenues—within the city's policy minimum. "The tax levy is a little under 12,700,000.0. Tax rate is increasing by 4.1%, which is an increase of 13 and a half cents, per thousand dollars assessed value," said Speaker 4, who delivered the initial budget overview.

Why it matters: the committee's recommendation moves the draft to the council workshop stage; the numbers remain preliminary and staff repeatedly warned that late adjustments and separate fund allocations (such as ARPA) change the summary sheets. "We'll be working on this tuning it up, and all these other numbers will come in, and then we'll have the real final numbers," Speaker 5 told the committee.

Key details and areas of committee focus

- Personnel: Staff identified two new positions in the draft—one GIS position in engineering and one administrative position in the clerk's office. Committee members asked that those additions be called out in the wage sections for council review.

- Benefits assumptions: Health and dental cost increases were discussed as placeholders; staff confirmed an 11% assumption for health and 15% for dental in the draft.

- Revenues and ARPA: Committee members flagged differences between packet copies on non-property taxes and intergovernmental revenue. One member reported seeing a $703,000 negative change on their copy; staff explained that prior-year ARPA receipts had offset revenues and that ARPA is recorded in a separate fund, producing apparent differences across the all-funds summary.

- Capital work and stormwater: Committee members questioned a capital projects total exceeding $15 million and noted discrepancies between packet versions on stormwater project amounts. Staff said some road and stormwater projects were carried forward and that fund and packet versioning can produce apparent inconsistencies.

- Department specifics: The committee pressed staff on contracted building-inspection revenue (explained by a return to in‑house inspection staff), ambulance-run revenue forecasting, and rising telecom/IT operating costs tied to mobile-device deployment and a network backup service shifting to monthly operating expense.

- Parks and recreation: Staff outlined a fee policy update and revenue mix for parks and the sports complex, noting fee increases and that Pewaukee youth baseball's facility-use arrangement contributes facility payments and capital investment.

Quotes from the meeting

"The tax levy is a little under 12,700,000.0. Tax rate is increasing by 4.1%..." — Speaker 4, budget presenter.

"We'll be working on this tuning it up, and all these other numbers will come in, and then we'll have the real final numbers." — Speaker 5, staff.

Vote and next steps

Speaker 10 moved that the finance committee "approve the budget as it is at September '26," a motion seconded by Speaker 1; the committee approved the recommendation by voice vote with no recorded opposition. The transcript records the voice vote with members saying "Aye," but individual roll-call tallies were not recorded in the meeting transcript. Staff will label the packet "finance committee recommended" and forward the draft to the full council for the next workshop.

What remains open: committee members asked staff to reconcile ambulance and stormwater figures across packet versions and to annotate the wage lines where new positions are included. The budget presented at the workshop remains subject to change before final council action.