Yuba City staff propose $7.7 million in reductions; council asks for direction to close $2.6 million gap

YUBA CITY, Calif. — City staff told the Yuba City Council at a Feb. 3 budget workshop that midyear projections show only small revenue growth and that a suite of departmental reductions is needed to address ongoing structural deficits ahead of the FY2026–27 budget.

Diana Pope, the city’s finance director, opened the presentation with a concise assessment: "This is a high level overview of the general fund." She said midyear projections showed "a small revenue increase of about $200,000 and a reduction of in expenditures of roughly 1,500,000.0," and put discretionary revenue for 2025–26 at about $40,700,000. Vacancies across departments were credited with roughly $1,300,000 in salary savings and about $200,000 in materials and supplies savings.

City Manager Robert Bendorf framed the longer outlook, saying the city’s total budget is "about 126,000,000, roughly" with approximately $62,000,000 in the general fund. "So out of roughly 40,000,000, we'll call it 41,000,000, the majority of it goes to public safety," he said, stressing that public safety and community services take the bulk of discretionary dollars.

Staff proposed a package of reductions across departments that staff estimated would produce roughly $7,700,000 in savings for FY2026–27. Key departmental proposals included:

- Fire: about $504,000 in reductions, largely through unfunding positions; staff warned of operational impacts tied to reduced staffing.

- Police: roughly $1,000,000 in reductions that include unfunding about 15 positions compared with last year; staff said the changes would reduce coverage on certain calls and traffic enforcement and estimated that $8–10 million or more in new revenue would be required to restore policing and public‑safety staffing fully.

- Community services and parks: proposals to increase some program fees and cut or eliminate low‑attended programs, saving about $1,300,000 to the general fund. Staff proposed keeping the regional GAP aquatic center open (cited at roughly 31,000 visits annually) but recommended dismantling or decommissioning a water slide whose repair estimate staff put "close to $100,000." Staff also identified three parks maintenance positions and a park supervisor position as likely targets for unfunding.

- Public works and utilities: recommended reductions of about $200,000 to the general fund portion and a review of contracts and operations. Staff also warned of an expensive state‑mandated outfall diffuser capital project, with historic estimates cited in the presentation as $25,000,000 (original), a later revision to $41,000,000, and an additional referenced figure of $61,000,000; staff emphasized the project’s cost could indirectly affect the general fund through rate changes.

Staff summarized that after the proposed savings and potential revenue adjustments there remained an estimated $2,600,000 gap to close before the June final budget. Bendorf told the council that staff planned to return with more detail on fee changes, reserve and contingency policy recommendations, and follow‑up budget workshops in May or sooner if needed.

Council members raised consistent concerns about employee morale, burnout and the limits of further reductions. Council Member Shaw voiced conditional support for the proposed direction but repeatedly highlighted the operational risks to public safety and service delivery; several council members suggested slowing some cuts when possible to protect staffing and morale. Several council members also encouraged staff to pursue revenue options alongside reductions, including near‑term fee adjustments and longer‑term economic development strategies.

On the GAP aquatic center, staff said they would open the season if the council agreed to decommission the slide and proceed with operations that preserve swim programming. A community services representative said fee increases were a possibility, with scenarios presented that included midyear increases around 25% and higher increases for some low‑use programs.

Bendorf and department heads emphasized that the recommendations were preliminary—not formal policy—and sought council direction on the general approach: a mix of targeted reductions, selective fee increases and continued search for revenue to avoid excessive one‑time reliance on reserves. "We're not just sitting idly by," Bendorf said, noting staff were also preparing economic development initiatives to grow revenue over time.

The council signaled general support for the staff’s direction while requesting detailed follow‑ups on specific program impacts, the proposed slide decommissioning plan, exact fee schedules and reserve policy changes. The workshop ended with the city manager saying staff had sufficient direction to continue analysis and return with more specific proposals; the meeting was then adjourned.

What happens next: staff will return with fee proposals and reserve policy recommendations at the next budget workshop or the May session, and the council will consider final budget adoption in June.