Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newport City Council approves 2025–26 budget after detailed review
Summary
After detailed line‑by‑line review, the Newport City Council voted to approve the 2025–26 budget as presented, approving a proposed tax rate increase and directing follow‑up work on several water and sewer financing issues.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Newport City Council approved the 2025–26 municipal budget following a special meeting that began at 6:00 p.m. Councilors moved to adopt the package "as presented," and the chair announced, "Ayes have it," concluding the formal vote.
The adopted plan includes a proposed tax levy described in the meeting as $5.09 $323,768.68 and a proposed tax rate of 1.6432, an increase characterized during discussion as roughly 4.58 percent over the prior year. Council members said the largest drivers of the increase are salary and health‑insurance costs. Council discussion also documented reductions made since a prior presentation that cut an earlier projected increase (presented Monday night) from about $450,000 to roughly $280,000.
Budget deliberations highlighted several department changes. Police Chief Travis noted a $10,000 estimated revenue line from a planned vehicle sale and asked the council to approve a five‑year, $45,000‑per‑year lease to replace aging tasers and body cameras, which were purchased in 2018 and are beginning to fail: "We have two that are out of service right now…we can't get parts for them because they don't make them anymore," he said, arguing that lease replacement and rapid vendor turnaround justify the ongoing annual payment.
Treasurer Johnson and staff explained how administrative salaries were reallocated among operating, water and sewer budgets: 25 percent of combined treasurer/clerk salaries were moved to water and sewer (12.5 percent each), and a portion of planned new administrative hires was treated as a partial‑year expense to reflect expected hiring timing. Councilors sought and received clarifications on where particular items had been placed in prior budgets (for example, some equipment leases had appeared in debt‑service lines).
Councilors praised staff for negotiating communications contracts that reduced costs by approximately $14,100, and department heads described incremental adjustments in fire, public works and parks budgets, including modest pay increases and deferred‑maintenance allocations. The council also discussed a long‑running set of "sinking funds" (committed reserves) and agreed to bring proposals to uncommit or formally reauthorize particular reserved lines before the next meeting.
The motion to approve the budget was made and seconded on the record; the chair called for the vote and announced that the motion carried. The council then moved the water and sewer rate discussion to continued deliberation at a later meeting.

