Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lake Stevens council debates consultant-led financial review and citizen task force to update city model
Summary
Councilmembers discussed hiring consultants for a phased financial-model update and forming a citizen task force; staff proposed a three‑month deep dive (phase 1) at $30,000–$40,000 and an all‑in model update near $100,000–$120,000, prompting debate over in‑house capacity, software and staffing.
City staff proposed a phased approach to update Lake Stevens' financial model and to create a citizen financial task force to aid in public education and potential future revenue initiatives.
Jean (city staff) told the council the recommended Phase 1 would perform a three‑month 'deep dive' into city finances to establish a baseline and verify internal accounting; consultants estimated Phase 1 at roughly $30,000–$40,000, with a full modernization (phases 2 and 3) and long‑term modeling rising to an estimated $100,000–$120,000 all in.
Why it matters: Councilmembers said they want reliable, repeatable forecasting tools as the city grows and faces structural budget choices. Some members argued a consultant provides an independent peer review and speed; others said the city’s finance staff should be able to scope the work or that an ERP/budgeting package might be a better long‑term investment.
Finance Manager Matthew Heist (S19) described limitations of the current Excel‑based model and the staff bandwidth needed to update it, while Jean recommended including a stormwater rate study in the work because that fund has not been updated in years. "If we're not spending the money, we're not getting that money back," Heist said earlier in the meeting, explaining the timing mismatch when grant reimbursement doesn't align with expenditures.
Council debate split on process: some members supported paying for an initial consultant‑led review to accelerate work and produce modern, shareable tools; others proposed exploring software or adding capabilities in‑house, particularly given upcoming staffing changes and a planned hire for a finance director and a management analyst who could help implement an ERP in the future. HR Director Warrington noted the city had scoped ERP possibilities but lacked staff capacity to project‑manage a full ERP rollout now.
Direction: Staff agreed to return with additional materials, including sample models and options for scope and cost, and suggested starting Phase 1 mid to late summer if council directed it. Council also discussed whether a council budget committee or a citizens' task force would be preferable; some members said a council‑level budget committee would keep decision‑making closer to elected officials while others valued community ambassadors if a ballot measure eventually required voter outreach.
Next steps: Jean will bring back example financial models and refined cost estimates and said staff could return in a month or two with proposals. Council extended the meeting 15 minutes to continue the discussion and set a goal for staff to bring more detail later this spring.
