Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables community development supplemental fund after debate over code enforcement, ESG and training
Summary
Councilmembers raised questions about revenue projections, use of an $800,000 supplemental fund and whether HUD-funded training can address customer-service concerns in Community Development. After amendments and debate, CPO 2025-26 was tabled 9-0 for further work.
Councilors on May 6 debated a proposed revision to the city's 2025 operating budget to establish a Community Development Supplemental Fund (CPO 2025-26) and to add ESG and HOME program administration. Controller Celita Green presented the ordinance and described departments and line items being added; councilors asked detailed questions about projected revenues, training and whether citations and fines would fund code enforcement.
Controller Celita Green described the proposed supplemental budget and line items: she said the community development miscellaneous budget line was $800,000 "consisting of $150,000 in contract maintenance and $650,000 in current charges," and that code enforcement funding included $25,000 for office supplies, $10,000 for printing, and $60,000 for current charges (total $70,000). She said revenue projections were based in part on prior balances and a $50,000 loan repayment, and she noted a projected revenue figure but did not provide a final multi-year forecast.
Several council members expressed concern about customer-service and staff culture in Community Development and asked whether HUD offers training or if the city could fund professional development. Councilwoman Ivy and others urged that the department invest in staff training; Controller Green said HUD offers classes and the department is pursuing those options.
Councilwoman Barnes Cwell moved to remove the community development components and later withdrew that motion, instead moving to table CPO 2025-26 to allow further work; the motion to table passed 9-0. In the same session council passed related budget and public-works items (CPO 2025-27) and approved a home-daycare special-use permit (CPO 2025-28). The council also voted to fail CPO 2025-25, a short-term-rental petition, after the petitioner did not appear.
Council members asked that future budget materials include clearer revenue projections, contingent funding plans for training, and explicit reporting on how code-enforcement revenues and citations will be used if they are to support staffing and operations.
