Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Fy26 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears FY26 internal-service and building-fund changes; staff flags evidence-building accounting reclassification
Summary
Council reviewed FY26 internal service funds, fleet leasing and capital items; staff said operations lines rose (repair/maintenance contractual to $105,000; property insurance to $90,000; lease rent to $390,000) and that the evidence building purchase will be shown in the building fund rather than the general fund.
City finance staff presented the final section of the FY26 budget review, focusing on internal service funds, capital replacement and building-fund line items.
Joni Baxter opened the discussion on internal service funds and said staff discovered a copy-and-paste error and had revised the materials. Brian Rittenhouse (public works) reviewed operations and capital line changes and explained timing-related adjustments tied to equipment delivery. "We increased that line to a 105,000," Rittenhouse said of repair and maintenance contractual, and he noted property-insurance budgeting rose to $90,000 and lease rent expense to $390,000 because of continued participation in an enterprise vehicle-lease program.
Staff explained a timing issue: the city received two trucks in May when one had been budgeted, creating a need for a budget amendment. On capital, Rittenhouse said staff planned to bring a request for a jetter truck at the next council meeting and continue budgeting for building improvements, including reskinning the wastewater treatment plant cold storage building and potential repairs or raising of a public-works/evidence building.
Baxter told the council she had reclassified the evidence building purchase and associated grants to the building fund (previously shown partially in the general fund), which changes the presentation of the general-fund bottom line and will appear in the first-reading ordinance and related budget amendment. "I realized that when I did the building fund that I had shown in two different places, and I really needed to show it all in the building fund," she said.
Councilors debated how to focus budget review: one urged clearer separation of discretionary versus nondiscretionary items and more explicit capital project priorities to enable policy choices. Staff said descriptive material on capital projects is available in ClearGov and asked for council direction on priorities. No final votes on budget adoption were taken at the meeting; staff said they would finalize numbers for first reading.
