Annapolis Finance Committee Meeting – May 11, 2026: FY27 Budget Deliberations and Recommendations
Annapolis Finance Committee Meeting – May 11, 2026
The City of Annapolis Finance Committee held a special meeting on May 11, 2026, from 2:18 PM to 4:53 PM to deliberate and approve the Finance Committee Report and Recommendations for the Fiscal Year 2027 budget. The committee, consisting of Alderman Huntley, Alderwoman O'Neill, and Alderman Thorp, reviewed each section of the report, discussed positions on various budget items, and voted on final recommendations. Deputy City Manager Guild, Assistant City Attorney Leonard, and Budget Analyst Turner were present to answer questions.
Consent Calendar
- The committee took no action on the approval of the FC 5.6.26 Regular Meeting minutes.
Discussion Items
- Top Priorities: The committee agreed to highlight transportation infrastructure (sidewalks, crosswalks, street lights, speed reduction, smart signals) as the top priority. They decided to include "better service delivery" (e.g., permits, parking, snow/garbage removal) and replace an outdated graphic with an "Annapolis Works" theme.
- General Fund Revenue: Discussed the revenue increase driven by property tax and an additional $1.2 million in income tax growth. Alderman Thorp raised the need to diversify revenue sources; the committee noted a recent resolution to explore other revenue opportunities and the mayor's suggestion to use philanthropic consultants.
- Challenges: Noted tightening of state/federal grants less severe than feared, but some positions (e.g., OEM) moved from grant-funded to general fund. Agreed to hold hearings on several topics over the next year.
- Capital Improvements: Recommendations focused on shifting from internal upgrades to externally visible improvements for residents, especially general roadways, sidewalks, brick sidewalks, and striping/marking.
- DPW Enterprise Accounts: Discussed stormwater fee increases. The committee recommended exploring an amendment to use Stantec’s revised fee structure and consider flattening the 15% increase over multiple years; staff will request Stantec to run scenarios.
- Fees and Fines:
- Short-term rentals: Agreed to increase fines for unlicensed STRs to $500 per night or twice the highest advertised nightly rate, whichever is higher.
- Proposed splitting registration fees: $700 for non-owner-occupied, $600 for owner-occupied, and ensure fees cover full program costs.
- Parks & Recreation: Recommended increasing non-resident fees but removed the proposal to lower resident fees.
- Mooring balls: Supported increasing daily fees from $35 to $45.
- Bus parking fines: Supported increasing fines for idling tour buses; left dollar amount unspecified.
- Mayor's Office / Committees: Recommended reviewing which committee meetings should remain broadcast online versus in-person, citing low viewership and staff strain.
- City Manager / Central Services: The committee debated adding a risk management specialist vs. a real estate manager. Majority (Huntley and O'Neill) supported removing the risk manager position and creating a real estate manager; Alderman Thorp abstained. Recommendation adopted: remove risk manager, create real estate manager.
- Information Technology: Alderman Huntley proposed funding AI systems exploration; O'Neill dissented against a 1% budget cut. The committee kept the AI recommendation but did not include a percentage cut.
- Finance Department: Agreed that contingency funds ($300,000) are too low, especially given snow removal overruns. Recommended increasing budget precision, which would likely require higher contingency; deferred specific amendment to later.
- Police / Fire: Supported 100% occupancy of sworn officers and strongly supported speed cameras. For the peak-time medic unit, recommended full accounting of costs (including repair/maintenance) and revenues (EMS billing).
- Public Works: Commended response to snow/ice storm; recommended fully funding snow removal technology, emphasizing visible infrastructure, quarterly updates, and street cleaning resources.
- Recreation & Parks: Recommended establishing maintenance schedules for parks, reporting on deferred facility maintenance backlog, and using budgeted funds ($45,000) to hire a pool management company for the Harbor House pool. Clarified that the city would not manage the pool directly.
- Community Grants: Reviewed 62 applications, awarded 35. Adjusted allocations: removed Bates Legacy Center (not in good standing), added back $2,500 to Heritage Baptist Community Garden and $2,500 to Annapolis Maritime Museum. Other changes were made to align with committee priorities.
Key Outcomes
- Motion: Alderman Huntley moved to approve the Finance Committee Report and Recommendations as discussed, with community grant modifications to be finalized by Alderwoman O'Neill. Seconded. Carried on voice vote.
- Next Steps: The committee will work with staff to convert specific recommendations into budget amendments. Notable amendments to be submitted include: risk manager removal, real estate manager creation, STR fine increases, Stantec fee structure amendment, mooring ball fee increase, and contingency fund adjustments.
- Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 4:53 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Committee is called order at 2 18 p.m. on May 11th, 2026. Thanks everybody for being here with us today. Yeah, we're what we're gonna do today is go through the finance committee report. We've got it up on the screen and really we'll just walk through it. Um I'm not gonna read every section by any means. The point is to just kind of go section by section. If one of my colleagues on the committee has something they feel like we need to further discuss, just jump in and raise it, and then we will vote on the recommendations for each section. Um we can start right here in the top. Uh maybe not right in the top unless any of you have an issue with my West Moore quote. But uh I think making clear what the priorities that were most commonly mentioned were a really good way to start this off strong. So um the we're we're working through exactly how to mention these, so transportation infrastructure, or perhaps just improved infrastructure, uh, which we have sidewalks, crosswalks, walkability, street lights, speed reduction, smart signals, and raise intersections. I think that covers it. I'm sorry. Yeah. Isn't there a part of this report that's in here? Um you're saying report to the city council, like it should give it a breakdown. I think the first thing should be the um the quote. Oh, does it uh oh well oh I see what you're saying? No, there was uh there was a graphic beforehand. Uh Mitchell is updating that graphic. Okay. Yeah, all right. Is there anything else we were missing? Yes, because that was in there. She actually had already updated it, but the one thing she didn't change was changing 26 to 27. So she's just gotta fix that. Okay. Okay, so improved infrastructure. I've just copied what was from that presentation. So sidewalks, crosswalks, walkability, street lights, speed reduction, smart signals, raise, oh, intersections. Yeah, I think that's yeah. I think that just about gets at it. And then with that, I'd be fine with deleting this better service delivery for residents. Um yeah, I mean, yeah, the reason I think we could delete it is because you think community programs and environment and sustainability more or less cover it. Um maybe the one thing that I'm seeing in here, or that I'm not seeing in here that was on my mind under service delivery is uh improved permitting times. So maybe I could just lump that under environment and sustainability or service. Well, no, I'm suggesting we delete service delivery because I think it's covered under other things. Or if you think there's enough things that are not covered, we can put a parenthesis behind it and list a couple things. Okay, so service delivery was not a term used in the brief. Correct. So that's why you're adding it there, because it was talked about. So I wrote better service delivery. And then you suggested later that we just use the terms for the brief, which I think is smart. So service delivery is sort of a holdover, and I'm suggesting we either cut it or if there are parts of service delivery that are not in here currently that we put a parenthesis to say what we mean by service delivery. How about I like your idea of service delivery and it I think karma had something, but you know, to your point, parent, permit, permits, parking, uh. removal, snow and garbage removal. Yeah. Yeah. That works.
openpublica.com