FY23 city budget approved; Mayor refuses to sign off

     Despite an almost-unanimous approval by the Monticello City Council concerning the city’s Fiscal Year 2023 budget, Mayor Dave Goedken refused to sign the budget, with a deadline of March 31.

     There was a lot of discussion during the March 21 council meeting about the budget. While a couple of city residents raised their own concerns, the council themselves were also at an impasse when it came to a half-year, flex position that was included in the budget.

     During the public hearing portion of the budget process, Mary Phelan questioned a figure she heard mentioned during the Feb. 21 council meeting, that the city was almost $500,000 in the hole.

     “That was the first I heard of that,” she said. “That concerned me.”

     Phelan also took concern with the fact that a Parks and Recreation comprehensive plan/study could cost almost $30,000.

     “That was alarming!” she said. “Did anyone else ask themselves if we should be spending that money right now? It’s not good timing.”

     So, she made a public records request of the city for the five previous years of city financials, balance sheets, and tax rates. She also thanked City Clerk Sally Hinrichsen and City Administrator Russ Farnum for their cooperation and time in explaining everything upon her request.

     “There was a critical column missing in the public notice,” Phelan said.

     She felt the city should be keeping track of how it’s doing/what it’s spending versus what it committed to spending.

     “That is necessary for accountability,” continued Phelan.

     She pointed out that in her calculations, the city spent more than what was originally budgeted four out of the past five years.

     “There’s an 80 percent chance it’ll go up,” she said of the FY23 city budget projections, due to inflation.

     Phelan also felt that it wasn’t great timing to hire an additional employee.

     “Six and a half years ago when we moved here, you had one person running that department (Parks and Rec),” she said. “You’re budgeting a lot for something that is considered leisure versus essential.”

     Phelan said she wanted to leave the council with a challenge… “Before you spend the money, think like a corporation. Is it necessary or essential? Is it a reasonable cost? Is there a way to do it internally without spending the money?”

     Goedken corrected Phelan on the $500,000 deficit comment. He clarified that the first draft of the FY23 budget showed the city was over budget by about $290,000.

     “But we are way overspent on our current budget,” commented Goedken.

     Council member Wayne Peach offered to Phelan that there are three pockets of money in which the city needs to fund: infrastructure, public safety, and quality of life.

     “These are things people look at when they come to a community,” he said of quality-of-life amenities such as parks, libraries, a pool, and more. “These make us a community versus a business.”

     Goedken still pressed Parks and Rec Director Jacob Oswald and Public Works Director Nick Kahler on the need for an additional employee.

     “We cut $350,000 but we left a half-time full-time staff?” he asked. “If we have another full-time employee, we’ll need to raise taxes. I don’t intend to sign a budget for a full-time employee.”

     Tom Osborne took question with the council’s action on the budget immediately following a public hearing. He asked how any public sentiment could be included in the budget?

     “How does public input get considered?” he asked.

     “The council could choose whether or not to adopt the budget,” said Farnum. However, if the budget were voted down, the city would automatically revert to the FY22 budget and tax levy rates.

     Hinrichsen said the council could also decrease the proposed budget, but they cannot increase it.

     “That has only happened once,” she said of the decrease.

     Farnum added that the council could set a special meeting before the 31^st to rework the budget.

     “There are things we can do,” said Goedken.

     Farnum corrected some misinformation and told the council that both the FY22 and FY23 budgets are balanced.

     “We’re spending money we collected two years ago that we bonded for the Sycamore Street project,” he said.

     Goedken questioned whether that project money was debt or revenue.

     “It depends on your perspective,” said Farnum. “We’re not spending more than we’re bringing in. We have substantial money in the bank.”

     With the 5-1 vote, Council member Brenda Hanken was opposed to approving the FY23 budget. She said she would not vote for a budget that included an additional city employee.

     “We have the sewer plant to worry about,” she added.

     Both Kahler and Oswald said they were warned that the council might vote to cut the position anyway, despite budgeting $50,000 for the half-time position (including wages and benefits).

     Peach asked what should happen if the council approved the budget but the mayor refused to sign it.

     “Is it still the city budget?” he asked.

     “Yes, unless he (Goedken) vetoes it,” offered Hinrichsen.

     “Sally has to sign it, too,” Peach said. “Those signatures just attest to what the council did; it’s not an approval or disapproval.”

     Note: The mayor has 14 days in which to sign or veto the FY23 budget.