Pepper Pike council probes 2025 budget assumptions; members ask for charter-required narrative and delay final vote

Pepper Pike City Council spent much of its Dec. 7 special meeting examining the proposed 2025 appropriation ordinance (Ordinance 2024-25), with council members pressing staff on revenue assumptions, pension funding and the documentation required by the city charter.

Staff presented the five-year forecast and told council that the budget uses a conservative approach to revenues. For example, the draft uses a $1.0 million placeholder for 2025 interest income; staff said that 2024 year-to-date results through October suggest roughly $1.4 million and that a 2025 figure of $1.2–$1.3 million would not be unreasonable. "I estimated that at 1.4 million," staff said when explaining recent investment returns.

Council members questioned why the draft did not update 2024 projections to reflect year-end expectations, noting that leaving the starting-year numbers unadjusted can make multi-year percentage changes harder to interpret. Members also sought more detailed line-item breakout for large "Contract Services" buckets, asking staff to identify the largest three items (examples discussed included leased body cameras, maintenance programs and plan-examiner fees).

Public-safety costs, including staffing and overtime pressures in police and fire, were a recurring theme. Staff described part-time hiring difficulties and said the city is evaluating whether to convert some part-time positions to full-time to reduce overtime. The draft also shows an increased employer-liability contribution and a projected drawdown in the fire-levy fund over the forecast horizon; staff noted some transfers are limited by state law.

Council raised capital-project questions as well: timing and financing for large items such as a fire pumper, sewer phases and street mill-and-fill work, plus grant contingencies for trail projects. Several council members asked for a single consolidated report showing each capital item, estimated cost and the proposed financing source (grants, assessments, internal cash or bonds).

A council member flagged several items apparently required by the city charter — a concise written message from the mayor summarizing the budget’s main points, a consolidated financing plan for listed capital improvements, and a monthly schedule of proposed expenditures by department — and said they were not yet provided. That member said they were uncomfortable approving the budget without those materials. Council discussed possible next steps and agreed to reconvene for a year-end true-up meeting (dates discussed: Dec. 18 or Dec. 30) after staff provides the charter-required narrative, capital-financing breakdowns and other requested details.

Next steps: staff will supply the requested narrative and financing summary, circulate revised projections where material, and return to council at the reconvened meeting for final action.