A considerable portion of the meeting was dedicated to discussing the budgetary allocations for various city departments. Interim City Administrator Bradley Williams presented the proposed budget, highlighting changes in allocations across departments such as city administration, parks and recreation, and finance. The city administration’s budget was proposed at $7.6 million, while the mayor’s office saw a slight budget decrease of 1.9%. The city administrator’s office, in contrast, experienced a significant increase of 18.5%. The human resources department required $2,307,101, notably increasing by 21.3%, while economic development saw a substantial budget boost of 24.1%, reaching $324,436.

A critical point of discussion was the utility billing system. The council grappled with ongoing challenges related to water meter accuracy, which has led to erratic billing. There was a request for additional staff to address these issues, as some residents reported unexpectedly high bills, sometimes in the thousands of dollars. The council deliberated on establishing a call center to streamline communication and improve customer service efficiency. The discussion also highlighted the need for an additional customer service specialist to manage the increasing call volume.

The conversation turned to the parks and recreation budget, where the council addressed infrastructure needs, including the renovation of sand volleyball courts and the replacement of park furniture. The budget for park holiday decorations was set at $150,000, maintaining the previous year’s allocation. Discussions included the allocation of funds for a new community events grant program, proposed at $75,000, to support community and cultural events organized by nonprofits.

The council also focused on the economic development department, which welcomed a new hire starting in August. Efforts to support her through an internship program with local colleges were discussed to ensure she feels supported in her role. Questions arose about the clarity and accessibility of the budget figures presented, with concerns expressed over the difficulty in navigating the budget process.

Another subject was the organizational shifts within city departments, particularly regarding the transportation position, which had been reassigned from public works back to community development. This reorganization raised questions among council members about the specifics of these changes and whether they had been accurately reflected in the budget.

The council discussed potential increases in utility rates, set to take effect on October 1st. Proposed increases included a 20% rise in stormwater rates, a 15.5% rise in water and wastewater rates, and a 15% increase in sanitation costs. The need for workshops to understand the financial implications fully was recognized.

Public comments raised additional concerns, such as the management of recreational facilities and the reliability of budget figures without a current community development director. A resident criticized the budget preparation process for containing “empty holes” and “typos,” suggesting a lack of transparency and involvement from key staff.