A major point of contention was property taxes and their burden on residents, exacerbated by rising labor costs and the devaluation of downtown properties. The mayor advocated for a lower levy of 6.4%, contrasting with the council’s proposed 6.9% levy. He pointed out that the budget added $65 million in spending, which he claimed would ultimately be borne by taxpayers. Additionally, the proposed budget includes nearly $7 million in extra spending, primarily funded through city reserves, which the mayor warned could threaten the city’s financial stability. The Chief Financial Officer expressed concern that depleting reserves could hinder the city’s ability to manage economic downturns and negatively impact taxpayers through increased bond rates.

Homeless encampments were also a issue, drawing attention due to a recent incident involving propane tank explosions. The mayor criticized the council’s decision to cut funding for a “compassionate response” to homelessness, which included outreach services and resources to prevent encampments. The mayor accused the council members of hypocrisy for requesting the removal of encampments while simultaneously cutting resources to address homelessness’s root causes.

Public safety and police recruitment were other contentious topics, with the mayor raising concerns over cuts to a campaign aimed at hiring more police officers. He stressed the city’s need for more officers, stating, “We need police officers in our city. We’re drastically short right now.” The mayor highlighted additional funding cuts from police resources, including $1.8 million intended for essential equipment purchases like cell phones for evidence collection. The Chief of Police echoed these concerns, emphasizing that a well-resourced police force is important for addressing violent crime and ensuring community safety. The Chief noted significant staffing losses, with over 500 sworn officers leaving since 2020, and stressed that the cuts send a damaging message about the city’s support for law enforcement.

The meeting further addressed the impact of budget cuts on essential city services like street repairs and pothole filling. The mayor argued that cuts to these services could not be justified by ideology but were necessary for operational efficiency and infrastructure care. City Operations Officer Margaret Anderson Kellerer supported the mayor’s stance, describing the budget as a result of a “chaotic and haphazard amendment process.” She warned that the cuts would hinder the city’s response to homeless encampments and negatively impact the Race, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging Department, which saw a nearly 25% budget cut.

The conversation also touched on the budget process, with a focus on the need for compromise before the January 1 deadline to avoid city operation disruptions. A potential workaround was discussed, which involved enacting a temporary budget should a compromise not be reached by the deadline. The speaker highlighted the unusual dynamics between the city council and the mayor’s office this year, noting an increase in proposed ordinances and amendments, with the current total nearing 80.

Despite the overall increase in the police department’s budget, constraints and legal minimums regarding sworn positions remain. The department has faced significant challenges, including an increased reliance on overtime for patrol staffing and fewer investigators available for rising caseloads. Concerns about federal funding changes under the incoming administration added further uncertainty to financial planning.

The next steps outlined involved a potential veto of the budget, with the council having the opportunity to sustain or override it. If sustained, negotiations would be necessary to align the budget with city service requirements without overburdening taxpayers. If overridden, the proposed budget would be enacted as is, a scenario acknowledged as less than ideal.