Finance committee reviews midyear CIP status, recommends reallocations and consolidations

Salinas finance committee members on Feb. 17 heard a midyear status review of the city’s capital improvement projects (CIPs) and a staff plan to reallocate and consolidate portions of the CIP budget ahead of a March midyear budget review.

"For the purpose of this review, city staff focused on the general funds and road improvement funds," A. Pedroza, assistant finance director, told the committee as he reviewed funding sources and timelines for projects. Pedroza said that as of Dec. 31, 2025, there was $23.8 million in unspent and unencumbered general-fund CIP budget. Staff recommends reallocating $2.4 million of that money to projects ready to move forward and deappropriating $60,000 that is no longer needed because projects are complete, returning those funds to the city’s fund balance.

Pedroza also reported $27.1 million in unspent road-improvement funds at the same date; $21 million of that total was recently appropriated as part of the fiscal-year 2025–26 CIP budget. Staff recommended reallocating about $1 million from road funds and deappropriating $238,000. He said staff prepared detailed timelines for 39 general-fund CIPs and 21 road-fund CIPs and will present the recommended reallocations and appropriations to the full council as part of the FY 2025–26 midyear budget review in March.

Selena Andrews, finance director, said the review is intended to be recurring and cautious: "All of that is important and staff is committed to continuing these, CIP reviews on a regular basis," she said, adding that staff must weigh project funding against capacity, required certifications, disruption to residents and alignment with council priorities.

Committee members pressed staff on pedestrian and traffic-safety items. A council member identified in the transcript as Gloria raised two District 4 concerns: missing pedestrian beacons on Bolero Street and possible traffic congestion and safety needs at a new Market Street commercial development. Gloria asked where such requests would appear in CIP documentation and who would pay for a new traffic signal.

Public works staff said smaller pedestrian-safety requests are being consolidated into a single pedestrian-safety CIP "so that we can maximize those funds," and noted that the Market Street signal is on Caltrans property and therefore under Caltrans jurisdiction. A public works speaker said the city has communicated willingness to participate financially if Caltrans decides to signalize the intersection, but added that traffic counts have not prioritized the location for Caltrans.

"So we've had this conversation with Caltrans. We've actually informed Caltrans that we would be willing to participate if they wanted to move forward with signalizing that intersection," a public works staff member said.

On traffic calming more broadly, staff said they are revamping the city’s traffic-calming program to prioritize projects that meet defined safety thresholds; the committee was told roughly $173,000 is allocated for traffic calming and that forthcoming program changes will prioritize school zones and other high-safety locations.

Committee members emphasized the importance of clearer communication and earlier engagement with advisory commissions — including traffic/transportation, planning and tax-measure committees — before items reach the full council. Members suggested additional finance-committee meetings to review CIPs in greater detail before council consideration.

No formal council action on the CIP reallocations was taken at the committee meeting; staff will bring the recommended reallocations and appropriations to the council as part of the midyear budget review in March. The committee approved the consent agenda (minutes of Jan. 13 and Feb. 3) by roll call.

The committee is scheduled to return March 10.