Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finance director presents FY2026 budget amendment; first reading highlights capital and one-time adjustments
Summary
On first reading of Ordinance 26‑12, the city presented amended FY2026 budget totals (General Fund resources $73,332,004; appropriations $54,060,893) and identified major items including a $2.207M fee allocation, a $162,000 transfer for road projects, police overtime, and a $70,000 additional general‑fund payment tied to a new appraisal on a men's rehab purchase (80/20 grant match).
At first reading the Richmond City Board of Commissioners reviewed Ordinance 26‑12, an amendment to the FY2026 budget that the finance director read into the record. The ordinance presented summary totals and several notable line items that staff said required adjustment.
Key numbers read by Finance Director Sharon Kane included General Fund total resources of $73,332,004, appropriations of $54,060,893 and an estimated ending General Fund balance of $19,271,111. Other funds shown: Municipal Aid Fund resources $813,912 (appropriations $805,700); Capital Projects Fund resources $13,864,884 (appropriations $11,108,733); the Whitehall Historical Site and a Men's Rehab Center line were also included.
City staff highlighted several large or one‑time items driving the amendment: a roughly $2.207 million portion of a $9.01 fee allocation; a $162,000 one‑time transfer to the municipal aid (MAP) account to cover road projects and added salt expenses from a harsh winter; higher police salaries and overtime tied to special events and weather response; and a $13,261 overtime payroll tied to January ice storms that staff said is not reimbursable. The manager also explained a newly required appraisal raised the city's general fund payment for the men's rehab center purchase by about $70,000; the project is an 80/20 match with the federal program and the city anticipates recovering 80% of eligible expenditures.
Commissioners asked clarifying questions about the appraisal and the use of opioid abatement funds as a potential local match for project costs that exceed grant amounts; staff said the county would share costs over a certain threshold and that federal approvals are pending, with potential 90‑day delays caused by federal office closures.
The ordinance was presented as a first reading and did not receive final adoption. Staff said budget packets are being distributed to departments and additional budget review meetings will occur over the next several weeks.
