Lee's Summit finance committee reviews worst-case FY27 budget that could require deep staffing cuts

On April 20, 2026, the Lee's Summit Finance & Budget Committee met in Council Chambers for a work session in which City Manager Mark Dunning outlined revenue risks and a worst-case FY27 budget scenario that would roll many departmental budgets back to fiscal 2025 actuals and could lead to substantial personnel and service reductions.

Dunning told the committee the administration is preparing the FY27 general fund and public safety sales-tax budgets amid notable uncertainties: a preliminary decline in Jackson County assessed valuation (which accounts for roughly 30% of city revenue), an assumed 3% combined growth in sales and use taxes, rising health-care costs, the financial impact of recently negotiated collective bargaining agreements, and increases to LAGERS pension costs. "Preparing this budget is keeping me up at night," Dunning said, and added that "a budget is a plan and we work that plan throughout the fiscal year." (Mark Dunning, City Manager).

Why it matters: the choices the committee makes this spring determine whether the city uses one-time reserves, raises new revenues, reassigns costs, or reduces services and staff. Dunning presented 'scenario one' as a test case intended to show how the city could balance the budget if revenues remain constrained and collective-bargaining costs are realized.

Key assumptions and headline figures in the presentation: staff assumed zero property-tax growth given the county uncertainties; a 3% aggregate sales-and-use tax growth; collective-bargaining and other contract commitments plugged into the FY27 projections as multi‑million-dollar increases; and an approximate $1 million pressure tied to LAGERS (the city's pension contributions). Dunning also noted an illustrative $2 million placeholder for potential core wage range enhancements (in addition to merit/cola represented elsewhere).

Scenario one would revert many departments to FY2025 actual spending and apply the known contract cost estimates; staff estimated that operational adjustments and modest revenue steps identified so far would not fully close the resulting gap. The presentation outlined identified levers: roughly $2 million of operational efficiencies already flagged, increasing capital chargebacks to recover staff time (an example $1.1 million figure was discussed), potential development-fee updates, and several small revenue options (e.g., in-house tax-collection services, modest transportation-tax capacity). The scenario also estimated approximately $4.6 million in service-level reductions and cited a workforce impact in the ballpark of 71 FTEs (figure includes vacancies and was described as approximate). Dunning framed these as potentially visible reductions across the organization if the city were compelled to reach the scenario's numbers.

Committee members probed the slides for consistency and timing. Questions focused on whether the scenario included new collective-bargaining amounts (staff confirmed those estimates were plugged into the scenario), how sales-tax projections accounted for large developments, and when county assessed-valuation numbers will be final (staff said the county typically issues final figures in July and levies are set in August). Mayor pro tem Lopez summarized the committee's stance: "Scenario one is probably where we need to start, worst-case scenario in my opinion." (Mayor pro tem Lopez).

Stormwater utility and ballot timing: staff warned that relying on a proposed stormwater utility to close recurring general-fund gaps would undermine the utility's intended expansion of services. Staff estimated current stormwater-related spending at roughly $700K–$800K and noted other affiliated costs at several hundred thousand dollars; the proposed utility was presented as an enhancement to expand services, not simply a vehicle to shift existing general-fund obligations.

Next steps: staff will return with more detailed numbers at the May 4 Finance & Budget Committee meeting and plan to post the public hearing notice for the council agenda if materials can be finalized; the administration noted flexibility to open and continue public hearings if more time is required. Dunning emphasized the presentation was an exercise to prompt direction and that more refined proposals and trade-offs will be brought back for committee guidance and later Council action.

The committee did not adopt any of the scenario’s cuts on April 20; instead members asked staff to develop targeted analyses and to prioritize protecting core services such as public safety and infrastructure maintenance in follow-up materials. The work session concluded with scheduling items for May 4 and reminders about subsequent hearing and reading dates.