Council members debate more frequent public budget reviews; no formal action

A councilmember raised concerns about recurring budget timing and transparency and proposed more frequent public reviews or a town‑hall style presentation after the April election.

The councilmember said the city had overestimated revenues and previously lacked a timely budget and asked for a public forum with staff presentations to show where the city stands on expenditures. “I'd like to have a public forum to where all the council members… we can all talk about this in public,” the member said, arguing that the public deserves clearer, periodic updates.

City staff and other council members cautioned that motions were out of order during the manager’s report and that the formal budget preparation and approval process typically follows a November–December calendar. A city official said the information a councilmember requested could be shared and that councilmembers can disseminate the materials they receive, but formal changes to the budget process should follow established procedures and not circumvent public‑meeting law. The mayor and city attorney‑role speaker indicated such repeated biweekly reviews could create procedural and operational problems.

No motion taking immediate action on the budget process was in order at that time; council members agreed they could put a budget review item on a future agenda if two members requested it. The discussion ended with staff and council agreeing to follow the regular agenda process for any formal changes.