City finance director says $30.1M bond measure spreads a state loan due March 3 over three years

During the Feb. 18 public hearing on a refunding bond ordinance, residents pressed officials about the city’s fiscal position and asked whether the proposed $30,100,000 borrowing was the same $30 million the mayor had referenced in public statements.

Benjamin Guzman, the acting finance director, said the borrowing is intended to pay back a state loan due on March 3. “We are doing a three‑year bond anticipation note to be able to spread out the cost of paying this $30,000,000 to the state over the next three years,” Guzman said, adding that the approach “is the smallest impact that we can do” so the city would not have to raise that $30 million in the 2026 budget.

Public speakers, including Donna Jackson and others, criticized repeated borrowing and alleged that past administrations and development deals left the city vulnerable to large deficits. Several speakers called for clearer budget documents and for identifying administrative spending lines such as executive protection and “other expenses.” Guzman acknowledged the need for follow‑up and said a balanced budget will be submitted to the council in the coming weeks.

Why it matters: The ordinance would authorize borrowing designed to cover an imminent state obligation; if passed, it changes near‑term fiscal strategy and affects borrowing costs and budget choices. Residents voiced concern about repeated use of short‑term borrowing and the city’s overall deficit trajectory.

What comes next: The council adopted the ordinance after the hearing and will receive more detailed budget documents from the finance department; residents and council members requested further transparency on the use of temporary funds and long‑term fiscal plans.