A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to an in-depth review of the city’s financial situation. The Department of Finance presented details on the current budget, revealing a steady workforce with 990 vacancies, 64% of which were within the Department of Public Safety. However, the city faced a shortfall in tax revenue due to County Board judgments and other tax appeals, even though the overall anticipated budget revenue was met.

The council delved into discussions on various revenue streams, including local revenues, state aid, and construction code fees. Notably, there was a rebound in construction code fees as the issuance of building permits and construction work resumed post-pandemic disruptions. Other sources of revenue discussed were pilots, tax abatement revenue, and the Municipal Utilities Authority (MUA) franchise fee. The franchise fee was particularly notable, as it had brought in $30 million in the current year but was expected to decrease to $10 million in the following year, raising questions about how to cover the impending gap in the budget.

The council also reviewed emergency appropriations for accumulated absences and tax appeals. The need to understand what was not funded in each department’s budget was raised, and a commitment was made to provide detailed spreadsheets for further analysis.

Healthcare costs, a prominent concern, were projected to increase by $7 million. In response to this, the council considered a proposal aimed at reducing these costs through preventative healthcare and wellness initiatives for city employees. Suggestions included potentially building an employee fitness center or partnering with local gyms to encourage healthier lifestyles. While recognizing the potential benefits of such preventative measures, the council noted that specific initiatives would require further review.

Another point of discussion was the Insurance Fund commission, which had overrun in the previous year due to court-ordered settlements and judgments. The current year’s budget had increased the allocation for the Insurance Fund to cover these unforeseen expenses. Budget allocations for statutory expenditures like pension obligations and social security were also discussed, alongside concerns about the adequacy of funds allocated for tax appeal settlements.

The reserve for uncollected taxes, which had doubled from the previous year, was attributed mainly to County Board judgments. This increase did not prompt further questions from the council.

Attention then turned to the capital budget, which included a $3 million appropriation for down payments on capital improvements and the authorization of $57 million in bonds or notes for various projects. Council members requested a detailed breakdown of funding allocations, particularly for park improvements and whether specific projects were included in the budget plan.

The public comment portion of the meeting brought residents’ concerns to the forefront, including frustration about the impact of tax increases and skepticism about city spending on infrastructure projects. The public called for greater transparency and accountability in fiscal management. In response, a council member addressed these concerns by discussing the city’s financial position, recovery efforts from the pandemic, and the importance of a comprehensive assessment of the pilot and abatement portfolio, as well as the city’s cash surplus and long-term financial planning.

Discussions about potential tax increases highlighted the impact on homeowners, with the council debating a $60 million increase that could result in over a 10% tax hike for the average homeowner. The council also grappled with the challenges of managing expenses related to personnel, health benefits, and pension costs, and compared tax and government efficiency with other states.

Lastly, the allocation of funds for building improvements, particularly for public safety buildings, was debated, with a focus on the need for clarity on the purpose of the funds. The possibility of purchasing recycling bins with tops to address the city’s trash issue was also discussed, with varied opinions on the feasibility of this measure.