Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Manager outlines FY2027 budget, projects $37.4M general fund and modest tax impact
Summary
City Manager Jesse Baker presented the proposed FY2027 budget and 10-year CIP, citing $37.4 million in the general fund, an estimated $23.0 million to be raised by property taxes (about a 3.3% tax-rate change) and utility-rate increases impacting average residential bills.
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Manager Jesse Baker presented the proposed fiscal year 2027 budget and the FY2027–2036 capital improvement plan, saying the package reflects council goals to sustain current service levels while limiting property-tax increases. "This spreadsheet shows our proposed general fund budget at $37,400,000 with $23,000,000 to be raised by the property taxpayers," Baker told the council.
Baker summarized assumptions behind the figures: 1.5% growth in the grand list, 20% TIF growth in city center, contractual cost-of-living increases for union employees, a 10% health-insurance premium increase, and a 6% increase in the Green Mountain Transit assessment. He told the council the proposed total city budget is about $58.5 million and the average homeowner would face roughly a $79 annual increase, with an average condo owner seeing about a $53 increase. The manager also called out a $1,250,000 paving allocation the council committed last year and a 4.3% increase in general-fund contribution to the CIP for infrastructure needs.
Baker told residents the budget includes $78,000 in one-time funds to support three projects — a signal upgrade at Patchen Road and White Street, library self-checkout replacements, and the South Burlington City Center collaborative — and leaves approximately $455,000 above the city's 16.66% fund-balance target for council consideration. He also emphasized that staff budgeted conservatively for non-property-tax revenues to reduce pressure on taxpayers and that utility-rate changes reflect usage patterns.

