Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the CIP topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff flags reporting quirks on CIP, impact fees tied to Main Street and Crossings projects
Summary
Finance staff told the committee some CIP and impact-fee lines are showing budgeted amounts that are actually prior‑year fund transfers for specific projects (Main Street enhancement, Crossings Park renovation), and said the reporting format will change to show prior‑year funds to reduce confusion.
During the capital improvements section Burnett told the committee that several line items in the CIP reflect prior‑year fund transfers earmarked for named projects rather than new revenue. She said a $947,000 traffic-and-park impact-fee line was actually moving prior-year funds to pay for a Main Street enhancement project, and a $1,500,000 Sunday-liquor-permit line reflected prior funds planned for a Crossing Spark renovation rather than current-year revenue.
"We should be using a line called prior year funds because that's what in reality is," Burnett said, and recommended restating those entries as prior-year transfers to avoid misinterpretation. Council members requested more frequent visibility on special-fund balances (hospitality tax, TIF) and a future workshop on alternative funding sources as CIP and carry-forward decisions are finalized in the FY2026 budget process.
