Charlotte City Council Budget Discussion and Financial Partners Review - May 19, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Charlotte City Council Budget Discussion and Financial Partners Review - May 19, 2025
The Charlotte City Council held a special meeting on May 19, 2025, starting at 5:45 PM, to discuss potential adjustments to the city manager's proposed budget for fiscal year 2025-2026. The proposed budget is balanced and prioritizes strategic goals without a tax increase. The manager identified $5.3 million in unallocated ARPA revenue replacement funds available for one-time expenses. A major focus was the allocation of financial partners (community grants), with discussions on criteria, scoring, and requests from multiple council members. The council voted to refer the financial partners list to the Budget, Governance, and Intergovernmental Relations (BGIR) committee for further analysis, with a final straw vote planned for June 2, 2025.
Consent Calendar
- None noted.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comment period was held during this meeting.
Discussion Items
- Financial Partners Process and Criteria: Councilmember Mayfield presented a revised list of recommended financial partners based on two core criteria: an application score at or above the average for each category, and the organization's request not exceeding 30% of its total budget. She explained that this approach was intended to bring objectivity and consistency, moving away from an arbitrary 50-point threshold used by staff. Her proposal would allocate $444,430 from the $5.3 million ARPA fund, bringing the financial partners total to $1,256,468, a reduction from the $8.8 million requested by 51 applicants. Multiple organizations were highlighted as not meeting the criteria, including Power Up USA (scored 49 but over 30% budget) and Roof Above, Hearts for the Invisible, and others not in the initial staff proposal.
- Councilmembers' Requests for Additions: Several council members advocated for additional organizations to be funded, often citing the "people's budget" or prior commitments. Councilmember Brown expressed strong support for the people's budget and organizations like Save Our Children Movement, Freedom Fighting Missionaries, and Roof Above, arguing that scoring systems can be biased. Other members, including Mayor Pro Tem Anderson, asked to add Roof Above, Hearts for the Invisible, and the Charlotte Museum of History. Councilmember Mitchell requested Carolina Metro Reds and The Males Place. Concerns about federal funding cuts to nonprofits were raised by Councilmember Mitchell and Councilmember Johnson.
- Budget Philosophy and ARPA Use: Councilmember Driggs cautioned against using one-time ARPA funds for ongoing commitments, stressing that the budget is balanced at $812,000 for financial partners and any excess would require an offset. Councilmember Graham supported no tax increase but emphasized financial discipline. Councilmember Watlington questioned the optimization of budget allocations, noting that some organizations (e.g., Tree Charlotte, LISC) were moved to other city department budgets after initial inclusion in financial partners, raising concerns about prior missed opportunities.
- Other Budget Items: Councilmembers requested additional analyses, including: pay grade increases for city staff (targeting $24-$26/hour), paid parental leave coverage for miscarriages and stillbirth, healthcare cost support for firefighters and police, an increase in minimum wage to $25 per hour, tree canopy program continuation, and compliance with the 26% small business participation goal for the Bank of America Stadium renovation project. Councilmember Johnson questioned the use of $41 million in hospitality and tourism fund reserves, arguing for their availability for operations given the housing crisis.
Key Outcomes
- The council voted unanimously to refer the entire financial partners list (including all councilmembers' additions) to the BGIR committee for further analysis, cost estimates, and policy refinement. A final straw vote will be held on June 2, 2025.
- The council also approved a motion to have the city manager review and provide expert recommendations on all other requested budget items (pay raises, health benefits, etc.) by June 2, 2025.
- The scheduled straw vote on May 29, 2025, was changed to June 2, 2025, due to multiple councilmember conflicts.
Meeting Transcript
Budget. The city manager presented his budget and proposed that the and it is balanced and incorporates resources to many of our strategic priorities. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss any potential adjustments that should be made to the budget. So we um had the budget hearing. We've heard a number of folks, and thank you for those of you who have come to attend and express what your concerns are. Um that feedback was valuable. Everyone has had this budget, I think since I said May 5th, right? And we've had some time to read through it individually as well as the opportunity to ask for clarification questions of the manager. Today is the time that we discuss it, the budget proposed together and formulate any changes that we may want to take. For the process today, I'm proposing that everybody have an opportunity to express their perspective and have us take the time to um speak to the things that you find most important or most um advantageous for us. And then at the end of those comments, I would hope that if you have any suggestions for amendments or adjustments to the proposed budget, that we begin to do that as well. Um keep in mind that the proposed budget is balanced, so staff will have to do some work as they as you if we propose additional reductions or any um adjustments that are not one-time revenue expenses. As a reminder, the manager has identified 5.3 million and ARPA revenue replacement that is currently not allocated and available to fund one-time expenses. Also, please note that we definitely do not have the need to allocate the full amount of this at any time, which would be preserved for capacity for us to address any future policy decisions that may emerge in the future. So with that, let's see. I'm gonna turn this over again. Once after all the council members have been recognized and had the opportunity to speak, we will determine what will move forward and further consideration for any of the potential adjustments. Um our policy has been that if there are five or more votes for any proposed change, that change will move forward for the staff to do more analysis of the cost, the considerations, and the consequences of that proposed change. And that item will be included for consideration at the straw votes meeting on Thursday, May the 29th. So I believe that that is that I think there's something that has changed, and I'm sorry, Mr. Mitchell, help me out on the date for that. Thank you, Mayor. I think there are several colleagues that are scheduled to be absent on the 29th. And so I will rather choose a date that most of us could be here. So I think the next opportunity will be June 2nd at our committee report out. But I think there are several colleagues who say that the 29th, they have a conflict, they would not be present to vote. Okay. So my understanding is that we're we'll let us at come back to this at the end of the meeting, we'll get everything done, and then that's something that we can work out with the scheduling. So give the manager a moment to look at his schedule and see how that works for the organization as well. Yes, yes. Clarifying question, Mayor Marie's gonna get us started. Um, I would just want to verify. Do we want to let Marie get started or do you want me to go over where is in front of everyone? I'm sorry. There's a proposal, a budget proposal that's in front of everyone. Manager, did you want to kick it off and then you'll pass it so that I can share where we are? Thank you. Okay. I don't think that I have that. Do you have does everyone else have it right here? This is the blue dot. This is it. All right, the agency for neighborhoods. Oh, now I see the red. I'm sorry, it was blue and now it's red. Okay, we'll follow if there's unless there's some discussion or not, Miss Mayfield has suggested that we do this. Mr. Jones, is that's workable? Sure. All right.
openpublica.com