Bloomington City Council Budget Work Session — October 1, 2026

At the Oct. 1, 2026, work session, Bloomington city councilmembers met beginning at 6:30 p.m. to discuss draft budget amendments ahead of the upcoming budget adoption. No votes were taken and no public comment was offered. Participants included councilmembers Isaka, Courtney, Isabel, Hope East Osberg, Sydney Zoe, and later Dave Rallo; City Controller Jeff McKim answered technical questions. The agenda and minutes were not included in the source materials.

Discussion Items

• Sanitation subsidy: An amendment would reduce the sanitation subsidy by $600,000, from $1.6 million to $1 million. Supporters cited the sanitation department's rate-increase plan, presented to the fiscal committee, which assumes only $1 million in subsidy; if the rate increase is not approved, funds could be reallocated later. Councilmember Isabel agreed to co-sponsor, and final language will be worked out with Larry Allen.
• Election operations/public works line: A councilmember proposed trimming the election operations line, which grew from $575,000 last year to $1.2 million. Controller McKim said the line includes $650,000 for the city's general election portion, $350,000 for Brighton B Town, $218,000 carried from the 2026 adopted budget, and smaller items. He also noted the 2023 election cost $471,804. A councilmember said she would reduce the line to the $218,000 base if the remaining components were not clarified.
• Branding implementation: Amendments proposed cutting $10,000 budgeted for branding implementation; a broader version also cut other items such as leadership development. Councilmembers did not settle on a version.
• Transportation demand manager: Councilmembers discussed eliminating the vacant TDM position in the Economic and Sustainable Development Department and the matching salary-ordinance line. Supporters said the position did not meet its carpool/transit goals, BT ridership is down, and planning staff already do effective outreach. Some hoped to redirect the funding to food security or climate-action work.
• Parking study implementation: An amendment would remove the $2.5 million placeholder for parking-study implementation until the administration explains what will be purchased and how the funds will be used. There was broad support for requiring more detail before appropriation.
• Housing trust fund: Amendments would reduce or possibly eliminate the housing trust fund appropriation. One proposal left $1 million available and required reporting before more was spent. A councilmember said they had not received a response from housing staff after a week and was inclined to take it down to zero. Councilmembers stressed support for affordable housing funding, but wanted transparency, clearer priorities, and possibly an ad hoc committee to oversee major allocations. The controller said he had compiled the requested list of capital expenditures over $100,000 and would share it.
• Controller software/ERP: A $600,000 appropriation for new financial/ERP software was questioned because the budget narrative tied it to outcome-based budgeting, but the administration reportedly said there would be no near-term outcome-based budgeting. Controller McKim and others countered that the New World system is outdated and core financials must be upgraded before HRIS; the administration is preparing a detailed response memo.
• Planning studies: An amendment would cut $265,000 for a corridor/sub-area study and $225,000 for additional studies/projects. Supporters said the city has spent too much on studies and should start implementing; opponents noted some studies are prerequisites for future MPO funding, can stay relevant longer than plans, and may help implement projects like the Kirkwood corridor. No consensus was reached.
• Historically overfunded accounts and telemetry: One amendment reduced several accounts that have been regularly underspent and removed $274,250 from the risk-management fund for fleet telemetry. The controller said telemetry is intended to improve vehicle safety and reduce accidents. Some councilmembers warned against cutting contingency cushions and second-guessing staff.
• Travel reduction: A 25% across-the-board cut was discussed. One participant noted clerk's office staff are required to obtain certifications, with individual costs up to about $2,000 including registration, hotel, and travel; the clerk's own recent travel costs were offset by the Clerk's League. Others questioned travel funded from the parking meter fund and opposed blanket cuts.
• Licensing/procurement: A councilmember proposed cutting $90,000 from a licensing line but could not recall the exact basis at the meeting and said they would provide more information. No decision was made.
• Special legal services: An amendment proposed cutting special legal services by $350,000. The sponsor said there was no need for the increase if annexation and litigation are not continuing. Councilmembers requested updates on the annexation lawsuit, the Beacon lawsuit, and a recently lost condemnation/eminent domain case involving the Showers business.
• Legal/risk administrative assistant: A councilmember proposed eliminating the grade 4 legal/risk administrative assistant position (about $79,000 fully loaded). Though it had been vacant, it has since been filled. Supporters saw it as overinvestment in risk management; others argued the city manages substantial public-space and workforce risk. No decision was made.
• Communications and community-relations positions: Councilmembers floated cuts to the public engagement director (vacant), a second communications position in the mayor's office (filled), a legislative affairs specialist, parks community relations manager, and health/wellness coordinator. A councilmember argued centralized communications overemphasize mayoral promotion, citing the branding report and a delayed citywide boil-water notice, and proposed funding the communications director for only half the year to force a restructuring discussion. Others cautioned about losing staff and urged a more deliberate review.
• ESD restructuring: One councilmember argued the Economic and Sustainable Development Department has become unwieldy, with high arts-administration overhead, and proposed moving economic development back to the mayor's office, relocating sustainability to parks or planning, and increasing direct community funding. To force that conversation, they suggested funding ESD positions for only part of the year. Other councilmembers asked for a workshop and raised concerns about the budget calendar and staff retention.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken; the session was discussion-only.
• The administration will provide a written response memo addressing each amendment before the budget's first reading next week.
• Councilmembers will continue drafting amendments; co-sponsorship and text changes were arranged for the sanitation amendment, with final language coordinated through Larry Allen.
• Controller McKim will share the capital expenditure list and follow up on the election-line breakdown and the licensing question.
• Budget timing: first reading is scheduled for next Wednesday, with a meeting on Oct. 14 and a deliberation session on Oct. 21. If the council makes complex cuts, the adoption meeting would be continued to a later date; the budget must be passed by Oct. 31, and a special session could be scheduled if needed.