Matthew, Germantown's finance director, told the General Government & Finance Committee that a five-year forecast of general-fund revenues and expenditures shows mounting pressure under plausible scenarios and that the village's debt-service levy is a key driver of future property-tax increases. "This is not taken to things such as when our tax increment districts close," Matthew said, noting the current presentation excluded potential TID closings and that further modeling with consultant Baird is planned.

The presentation outlined three scenarios: status quo (moderate growth), low growth (net new construction ~1.25%), and high growth (robust new construction and higher permit and state-shared revenue). Staff used assumptions including a 3% annual increase for nonunion salaries and benefits, a 2.5% annual increase in operating expenses, and an average police/fire step increase assumption that yields about an 8% annual average for those departments given step scales. Matthew said the low-growth scenario quickly produces gaps where revenues cannot keep pace with expenses; the status-quo scenario shows strains beginning around 2028, with the high-growth scenario pushing structural pressures further into the next decade.

On debt, Matthew said he removed a previously modeled $30,000,000 new-fire-station project from the baseline and emphasized debt-structure choices materially change the debt-service levy. As presented, the debt-service levy could rise substantially if all capital projects were debt-funded: Matthew cited an illustrative increase from about $5.8 million in 2027 to roughly $11.4 million by 2031 under one approach to structuring bond proceeds for general-fund projects.

Committee members asked whether projected property-tax bills assumed closing the annual budget gaps (they did not). Matthew said closing the gaps would require expense reductions or alternative revenue strategies. Trustees pressed for more detailed scenarios that incorporate TID closings and alternative debt structures; several members urged the planned Baird analysis in 2026 to model those alternatives. Trustee Jan Miller and others requested more transparency on inputs (footnotes, underlying assumptions) and a consistent template for reports so trustees and residents can evaluate projections.

What happens next: staff and the committee agreed to pursue deeper scenario modeling with Baird in 2026, include TID-closing variants, and return with more-detailed assumptions and notes. The presentation was informational and formed the basis for follow-up work rather than final policy action.