Idaho Falls staff recommend building FY27 budget around 3% statutory property-tax allowance
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
At a March work session, Idaho Falls finance staff proposed using the 3% statutorily-allowed property-tax increase as the baseline for next year's budget and holding foregone decisions until July; councilors signaled general support while staff warned some revenues (permits, impact fees) remain volatile.
Brooks, the city's assistant finance manager, told the council on Tuesday that finance is recommending the proposed FY27 budget be built around the 3% statutorily-allowed property-tax increase — roughly $1.5 million — with growth and annexation conservatively estimated and foregone decisions deferred until directors return final personnel numbers in July.
The recommendation was part of Brooks's presentation on FY24'25 performance and the city's outlook. "The 3% statutory allowable would be about $1,500,000," Brooks said during his briefing. He framed the approach as a way to prioritize employee costs first while leaving discretionary choices (a $525,000 foregone option, one-year capital items) for council review once more data are in.
Why it matters: staff said the strategy is intended to avoid repeated mid-process adjustments when departments return with revised personnel and program requests. Councilors pressed on several watch items that could affect capacity — notably low permit and impact-fee revenue so far this calendar year and uncertainty about one-time county reimbursements of property-tax late fees that the city recently received.
On one-time cash, Brooks warned the council not to rely on it for recurring services. He described a county settlement payment that produced roughly $700,000 in additional receipts last year as a one-time event rather than an ongoing revenue stream.
Council response: Several councilors expressed general agreement with using the 3% allowance as the baseline. One member said the practice in prior years had been to prioritize that amount for employee compensation first. Council members asked staff to return in July with detailed personnel projections so the council can decide whether to adopt the full statutory increase, take a smaller COLA, or use the allowance partly for capital priorities.
Next steps: Staff will prepare the proposed budget using the 3% baseline and the growth/annexation assumptions discussed, and will bring back personnel and foregone analysis after directors submit final numbers in July. The council directed staff to keep the process transparent and to include a clear reconciliation of where growth and one-time funds are proposed to be used.