Pacific aldermen debate budget projections, reject pause on a 1% raise and cut bulky‑trash line

Pacific’s city council met in a budget workshop to review the proposed July 1, 2026–June 30, 2027 budget and to consider several line‑item changes, formal motions and technical corrections.

The council opened by confirming roll call and moving directly to item 5, a line‑by‑line workshop on the budget. Staff told aldermen the paper packet is the legal document; the electronic spreadsheet is a working copy that must be reconciled with the printed version before adoption.

Why it matters: aldermen said the packet showed conflicting numbers and warned that relying on transfers or contingency could mask operating shortfalls. Several members pressed staff to correct specific line items before final approval and to clarify whether certain revenues (bed‑tax collections and grants) belong in the current or prior fiscal year.

Council members clashed over cuts and priorities. Alderman Gas said he would oppose any pay raises while general‑fund and utility cash cushions are limited: “I’m not voting for any raises in the budget,” he said. He also proposed removing one of two building‑department positions and sharply reducing or eliminating large maintenance and chemical‑treatment line items. Staff and other aldermen questioned whether cutting raises would cost the city experienced employees, with one member saying, “If you wanna lose your good people, don’t give them raises.”

On formal actions, the council considered and voted on multiple motions. A motion to remove a proposed 1% across‑the‑board pay increase scheduled for January 2027 was moved and seconded and, after debate, failed on a voice/roll‑call result the chair announced as five no votes to one yes. Later, a motion to remove the bulky‑trash allotment (approximately $18,000 from the general fund) for fiscal 2027 was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote; the chair declared, “Ayes have it.”

Budget‑technical items also drew sustained attention. Staff explained that a roughly $815,000 contingency transfer was included in the June‑30 projected cash balance because auditors had required the transaction; aldermen asked whether that money should be treated as available or restricted going forward. Finance staff agreed to correct an apparent PSAP (911) line‑item error that would reduce the police budgeted amount for the coming year and suggested any savings could be applied to police overtime.

Other operational items included discussion of a new $40,000 recurring line for body‑camera/system subscription and renewals, expansion of police camera counts to match staffing levels, debate over plaques and tourism spending, and a questioned $272,000 transfer appearing to move stormwater funds into parks. Councilors asked staff to verify whether the stormwater‑to‑parks transfer is correct and to return with clarified paper/spreadsheet figures.

What’s next: several items were deferred for more detail. The council withdrew a motion to eliminate a building‑department line pending further review, and members agreed to get more information from public works about sludge and ammonia treatment costs before acting. Staff committed to updating paper and spreadsheet figures and returning with corrected line items at the next meeting.

The council adjourned after approving the bulky‑trash cut and scheduling follow‑up on the outstanding technical and programmatic items.