Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Boulder City advisory panel presses staff for clearer FY26 utilities budget figures
Summary
Budget manager Angela Manninen presented FY26 utility figures and flagged packet errors; committee members pressed for clearer, comparable reporting and itemized explanations before the rate study.
Angela Manninen, Boulder City budget manager, told the Utility Advisory Committee that the FY26 executive summary contained a page showing FY25 wastewater capital projects in error and that the combined totals page mistakenly included depreciation in expense lines. “The total is correct at the $38,000,000 less depreciation,” Manninen said, “but those categories are not correct.”
Chair Larry Carr and other committee members pressed staff for clearer comparability between earlier packet versions and the updated numbers, saying inconsistent presentation makes it difficult for the committee to vet the numbers before they go to City Council. Carr said the committee needs packet line items that flow consistently across pages so members can “do our homework properly.”
Manninen read the headline figures included in the packet: total revenues for the four utilities are listed at $31,300,000 for FY26; total expenses less depreciation are listed at $38,200,000 and a larger figure including depreciation was read aloud as approximately $42,000,000. She also reported a water-purchase budget of $5,035,960 and read an energy-purchase figure aloud from the packet that was unclear in the transcript. “There was a minor change from the one in the packet,” she said, describing adjustments tied to changes in projected conversions of parks and the golf course to raw water that did not occur.
Committee members asked staff to include clearer footnotes in future packets that explain where depreciation appears (budget versus rate calculations), line-by-line reconciliations between versions, and a breakdown of which large customers (for example, municipal facilities or golf courses) drove month-to-month consumption spikes that could affect the rate model. Manninen and staff agreed to fix the packet error and return updated workbooks and to provide additional annotation and documentation for the rate-study kickoff.
The committee did not take formal action on the budget at the meeting; the discussion was presented for information and to inform the forthcoming rate study and capital budget work.
