Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Largo budget staff recommend planning for 5% property-tax growth, warn of cuts under lower scenarios
Summary
Budget staff presented FY27 revenue scenarios showing required spending reductions tied to property-tax growth (approx. $500K at 5% growth, $2M at 2%, $3M at 0%) and recommended planning on a conservative 5% assumption while identifying April–May work sessions and a Sept. 3 public hearing for the proposed budget and CIP.
City budget staff told commissioners at the Feb. 10 work session that the FY27 budget calendar includes additional work sessions (April and June), an April capital improvement presentation, and a May joint Finance Advisory Board review leading to a May 19 capital adoption and a Sept. 3 public hearing for the proposed tax rate.
The presenter reviewed draft FY25 actuals versus the adopted budget across multiple funds and said general-fund recurring structural imbalances had narrowed (the adopted budget initially planned nearly $9 million in use of fund balance, while draft actuals projected approximately a $1.8 million draw). Staff said some capital projects rolled forward into FY26 and that FEMA reimbursements materially affected the solid-waste fund results.
Staff presented three property-tax revenue scenarios requested by the commission: 5% growth (requiring roughly $500,000 in reductions to stabilize recurring drawdowns), 2% growth (roughly $2 million in reductions), and 0% growth (roughly $3 million in reductions). Staff recommended basing the initial FY27 budget on a conservative 5% property-tax growth assumption, while noting major cost uncertainties that were not yet reflected in the figures, including public-safety pension increases and property-insurance pressures.
Commissioners asked detailed questions about the assumptions, capital-project rollovers, and hiring controls. Staff said departments must clear vacancies with the assistant city manager before posting non-public-safety positions, and that more detailed project and fund-balance information would be presented at the April CIP work session. The presenter also said wastewater fund revenues were temporarily higher due to an anticipated $19M grant/loan tied to a deep-well injection project; commissioners asked staff to provide granular numbers for moved projects and FY26 budgeted revenues for wastewater and solid-waste funds.
No formal decisions were made; commissioners signaled general comfort with planning at a 5% property-tax assumption but asked staff for additional detail and for scenarios that would show deeper cuts if revenues fall short.
