Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews mid-biennial budget amendments: HR, court reclassification, parks requests and senior-center funding
Summary
At the Nov. 24 special meeting the Lake Forest Park City Council reviewed multiple mid-biennial budget requests: staff recommended including a climate position, an HR staffing change versus temporary support, municipal court reclassification adding 0.5 FTE, a citizen-backed $25,000 pickleball request, and a senior-center funding request. Staff will refine cost figures before a Dec. 11 vote.
Lake Forest Park — Council members used their Nov. 24 special session to examine several proposed amendments to the 2025–26 budget, directing staff to finalize numbers and return with ordinance language for a scheduled Dec. 11 vote.
HR support: Finance director presented a comparison of continuing temporary HR coverage versus hiring a 0.8 full-time equivalent. The meeting record shows an estimate of about $107,000 annually if the city continued a temporary agency arrangement, compared with a fully loaded 0.8 FTE cost that staff estimated at roughly $122,500 when benefits are included. Council members said direct hire provides continuity and long-term integration with other departments; staff will correct and finalize the schedule-of-adjustments figures in the packet.
Municipal court: Staff proposed reclassifying existing court positions into a tiered structure — judicial specialist, senior judicial specialist and court administrator — to reflect duties and to allow more experienced hires. The proposal includes a 0.5 FTE change and market-adjustment pay modifications to reduce hiring and retention issues.
Pickleball/parks request: A citizen group has raised about $22,000 toward court improvements and has asked the city to contribute an additional $25,000 for improvements at Lake Forest Park Elementary and Horizon View (windscreens, benches, LED retrofit, and possibly a portable toilet). Council members were divided: proponents framed the request as an equity and public-health benefit for children and recreation users; opponents said it is not a core city service in the current tight budget and suggested deferring. The council directed staff to include the item in the budget amendment packet for formal consideration and vote on Dec. 11.
Senior-center request: Council discussed a request tied to the Shoreline–Lake Forest Park Senior Center for supporting a social-worker/mental-health position. Meeting exchanges included several figures and internal reallocation options; council asked staff to clarify the exact net new appropriation before any final action.
Budget-stabilization vs. unallocated general fund: Staff noted a roughly $978,000 difference to balance the general fund and that the budget-stabilization account holds about $373,261.40. Council members debated whether to draw from stabilization or the unallocated general fund; a working direction favored drawing down the stabilization fund and using unallocated funds for the remainder, with a follow-up policy discussion recommended.
Next steps: Staff will update the budget packet with corrected numbers and return the ordinance for formal vote Dec. 11. Councilors asked that administration present clearer reconciled figures on any proposed reclassifications and fund reassignments before that meeting.
