Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents Warn Newport City Council Budget Would Raise Municipal Taxes About 20%; Council to Vote Tomorrow
Summary
At an informational meeting on March 6, 2017, residents and councilors questioned line‑item errors and the accounting treatment of one‑time revenue, warning the proposed budget would increase municipal taxes roughly 20%. The council tabled minutes for correction and will vote on the budget the following day.
Residents filled the council chamber Tuesday to press the Newport City Council on details in the annual report and the proposed budget, saying arithmetic errors and use of surplus help explain a large jump in the amount the city proposes to raise by municipal taxes.
A public commenter who began the exchange with staff on page 13 of the report raised multiple line‑item questions, including what appeared to be a mismatch in the water and sewer fund totals. “If you look at the total sewer operation, you got $1,000,005.45 for expenses,” the resident said, noting other pages list figures that do not line up and calculating an apparent shortfall of about $82,004.76. The speaker asked staff to investigate the formula or transposition errors but acknowledged that an immediate answer might not be available.
Other residents and councilors focused on how prior budget choices and one‑time uses of surplus affected the rate. The commenter outlined a series of items — a recently added $105,000 ambulance expense moved into the municipal budget and $46,000 previously committed for a bike path that was used to lower the prior year tax rate — and tied those decisions to a roughly $670,000 increase in the amount to be raised this year. “I think you somehow had a brain fade or something,” the commenter said, adding, “I think you didn't realize you were gonna see a 20% increase in our municipal tax.”
Councilors and other speakers disputed some calculations and pointed to long‑term patterns of modest budget increases as part of the explanation. One councilor reviewed 10 years of budgets to show a steady annual rise and said the proposed budget brings the city back to a sustainable level after years of under‑raising. Several speakers urged a structured public process for hard choices and recommended the council solicit alternative budgets so taxpayers can evaluate tradeoffs.
The meeting also included technical questions about the tennis court sinking fund, LED streetlight savings, and how committed fund balances were shown in the report. Staff and auditors acknowledged at least one placement error for a $150,000 assigned fund balance and agreed to correct the report.
Procedurally, the council moved to table approval of the February 27, 2017 minutes so the error about whether the prior meeting adjourned could be corrected; that motion carried by voice vote. The council scheduled the formal budget vote for March 7, 2017.
The meeting closed with a municipal‑process admonition from several residents: if the council seeks to reduce services, the public asked for clearer advance notice and for alternative budgets to be published so voters and taxpayers can make informed choices.
