Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nixa staff seek budget amendment to add three positions; council flags funding math

Nixa City Council · April 29, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City staff requested a $128,123 budget amendment to add three positions—a general foreman in electric, a utility worker in water, and one police officer (six months funded). Councilors queried the line-item breakdown and asked staff to return with an amended exhibit; formal approval was deferred for correction.

City staff presented a first reading of Council Bill 2026-11 asking the council to amend the 2026 budget by $128,123 to create and fund three positions across electric, water and police operations.

Public Works Director Travis Cossey described two positions tied to growth and an internal reorganization after the electric superintendent’s retirement: a general foreman to run lineman crews and an additional utility worker to handle facility mowing, valve exercising and hydrant flushing previously handled by the fire department. Police Chief Joe Campbell asked the council to add one lateral police officer; he said the city requested funding to cover six months of salary, benefits and equipment, and gave a precise figure: “The total for that is $83,620.78.”

Council members probed the budget exhibit and found the funding breakout (listed as $5,202 from the electric fund and $39,660 from the water fund) did not appear to cover the full six-month costs for two positions. Council member Shawn Lucas called the shortfall “a very good catch,” and staff acknowledged the amendment and the exhibit need correction. Council directed staff to return with an amended budget exhibit at the next meeting rather than approving the bill as presented.

No final vote on the ordinance took place at this meeting; councilors agreed to correct the figures and re-present the item.