Proposed general fund budget spending is for $8,151,792 versus last year’s $8,240,865 budget.
But for the most part, the spending cuts that department heads already made helped streamline the balancing act.
The departments within the city haven’t proposed any new personnel positions or raises, nor any new programs or projects.
And all departments, including council, plan to reduce travel expenses by 20 percent.
Department heads were commissioned by Budds to have this year’s budget the same as or below last year’s original budget. Budgets are studied and adjusted mid-fiscal year around December.
“We had really good cooperation, which results in the personnel requests being down by 1.6 percent, the operating expenditures are down just under 13 percent (or $89,073)…“ said Budds.
And the operating expenses proposed by the departments are “cut to the max,“ he said.
But right next to the cost cuts is a “sizable capital increase“ with spending requested for an additional garbage truck and a fire truck.
One city fire truck is 20 years old, which by national standards for fire trucks is the age of truck retirement and replacement.
Now the city needs to iron out the $68,398 difference in the general fund, either by cutting spending, upping revenue, or doing a little of both.
Options they discussed spanned both budget sides.
In the area of payroll spending, eliminating two positions within the city could save $70,000, or an across-the-board cut requiring each employee take one furlough day would save the city $20,000.
There was also the option of delaying fire and garbage truck purchases.
Among ways to up revenue, Budds and council discussed collecting the state-allowed mill increase for property taxes, increasing the current residential solid waste fee or moving more money out of the city’s utility fund budget into the general fund.
“There’s just no easy way to close that $70,000 (gap),“ said Budds.
One money source was restricted however.
With lower than usual collection from police traffic stops, Budds said the city does not and would not put a burden on the police department to increase revenue with more traffic fines.
“That’s definitely not a line item we tell them to go and meet budget projection on,“ said Budds.
“Where we’re at is $70,000 short of balancing the budget, which is a relatively small amount of money given the $8 million (general fund) budget size,“ said Budds.
The city’s other chief budget, the utility budget, is in balance with the proposed spending and expected money matching up at $23,835,598.
There are no plans for new program areas within the utility budget, though new personnel is still being sought for the city’s GIS or geographical information system position.
Budds and council members will further discuss options at next month’s meeting, May 12 at 7 p.m. at City Hall on College Street.
Post a Comment
