Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Special Council Meeting on Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget and Property Tax Levy – June 2, 2026

City Council — Tuesday, June 2, 2026

BodyMesa, Arizona

SessionCity Council

DateTuesday, June 2, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 1:06:16

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:00

Next, uh, thank you for staying with us.

0:02

Welcome to the special council meeting on June 1st, 2026.

0:05

All council members are present.

0:07

First, we'll conduct a public hearing on the proposed fiscal year 2026-27 budget and proposed secondary fiscal year 2026-27 property tax levy.

0:20

I declare the public hearing open.

0:22

Miss Mosley, do you have any requests to speak from the public?

0:26

And the blue cards that you received are all I've received.

0:29

These this is everyone?

0:30

Yes.

0:31

Okay.

0:32

All right.

0:33

First, we'll start with I'm just how they were handed to me.

0:36

Mr.

0:36

Winstanley, uh, you're first.

0:39

And followed by on deck is uh Dennis Miller.

0:42

Mr.

0:42

Miller, you're on deck after Miss Wins Mr.

0:44

Winstanley.

0:47

And Mr.

0:47

Miller, if you'd like to come to the front.

0:49

I don't know where you're sitting at, but anyway, you can come to the front if you like.

0:53

David.

0:54

Good evening again, Mayor, Council members and staff.

0:56

My name is David Wynn Stanley.

0:58

I live in District 6 near Eastmark.

1:00

I would like to make three comments regarding the budget you are about to pass.

1:04

The first is to thank you both the city council and city staff for listening to us and responding to our comments.

1:10

Thank you for holding three community sessions very early.

1:14

And while there wasn't great attendance of these, our community was impressed that you made the trip all the way out to talk to us.

1:20

Thank you for understanding specifically our concerns regarding the structural deficit and addressing it sooner than had previously been planned.

1:27

It is the sign of a great city when citizens feel like their voices are heard and responded to.

1:33

Secondly, may I ask you as the city council to ask the question more often is this within the budget, or is it an increase or a decrease?

1:41

I have heard this asked, but suggesting perhaps more often.

1:45

For example, in recent presentations in study sessions on the budget, the transit budget was mentioned for being the source of increased spending due to changes between Prop 400 and Prop 479, but it was not mentioned at all during the discussion in the January council meeting.

2:01

Next week you will be asked to approve a $2.4 million increase in transit spending over the prior year, even though you just approved something in January.

2:10

Is that increase justified?

2:13

Lastly, I would like to ask you to remain vigilant on how our tax dollars are spent.

2:18

You have the subject on your priorities under uh council strategic driver of intentional government and transparency and in the city operational priorities of effectiveness and efficiency.

2:29

Using the transit system again as an example, uh according to Valley Metro's website, the Fairbox recovery for transit is five percent.

2:38

That means the subsidy is 95% of all the bus rider cost.

2:44

Saying it another way, every time a bus rider steps on the bus, we taxpayers are charged $13.

2:51

Valley Metro ridership data suggests that the downtown buzz carries seven passengers on a 23 passenger bus.

2:59

I know these are averages and details, uh and the details matter.

3:02

I'm just asking that they be looked at as an example of the details of how our money is spent.

3:08

I understand from Transit Director Jody Sorrel, who is an excellent, wonderful person, helped me a lot, uh, that there are bus network redesigns about to come from Valley Metro, um, but there's no mention of it in the county council report.

3:22

Um, and so I'm simply asking that we look into it in detail as the budget goes forward.

3:27

Thank you for your time and thank you for your service to your community.

3:31

Thank you, David.

3:33

Dennis.

3:36

After Dennis, we have a Tony McElpray.

3:40

Praing, uh, you're on deck.

3:42

My name is Dennis Miller, uh Mayor and Council, thankful to be here tonight.

3:47

Appreciate the chance to speak.

3:50

I'm a 40-year Mesa resident, and I've taken some time and gone through and looked at the budget.

3:56

Uh, and I wanted to talk about some of the things I see because part of it is a little bit confusing and misleading.

4:04

The police department budget shows a decrease of 14.5 million or 4.6 percent.

4:11

That got me excited.

4:13

It's a real cut.

4:14

We're making progress.

4:16

But then look further in the budget, and I also see a brand new department, Mesa Public Safety Support.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Budget Equity Analysis█████████████████████████████████████████████63%

Fiscal Sustainability███████████16%

Public Engagement██████8%

Public Safety█████7%

Technology and Innovation██3%

Engineering And Infrastructure█2%

Procedural█1%

Summary of Proceedings

Special Council Meeting on Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget and Property Tax Levy – June 2, 2026

The Mesa City Council held a special meeting on June 2, 2026, to conduct a public hearing on the proposed fiscal year 2026-27 budget and the secondary property tax levy. After hearing public comments and extensive discussion, the council voted to approve the budget. City staff defended the budget as fiscally responsible, while many public speakers raised concerns about structural deficits, pension liabilities, and transparency.

Public Comments & Testimony

David Winstanley (District 6 resident) thanked the council for community budget sessions and asked for more scrutiny of transit spending, noting that the fairbox recovery for transit is 5% and each bus rider costs taxpayers $13.
Dennis Miller (40-year Mesa resident) pointed out that apparent cuts in the police budget were offset by a new Public Safety Support department, resulting in a net increase. He asked for a reconciliation showing real cuts versus reshuffling.
Tony McElprane (Mesa resident) focused on the unfunded pension liability of $691 million in public safety retirement funds, noting that the city's payments are insufficient and the debt grows at 7.2% per year. He requested a plan to address it.
Bob Hathcock (District 2 resident) questioned the growth in employee costs (total $763 million) and asked for a target ratio of personnel costs to revenue, a year-over-year staffing comparison, and a plan for the unfunded pension promises.
Scott Webster (District 6 resident) expressed concerns about the impact of multiple data center developments on infrastructure and water/power reliability, asking for assurances that the budget is not affected. The mayor and vice mayor offered to follow up.
Kerry Davis (Mesa resident) urged a no vote on the budget, comparing Mesa's liabilities (2.787 billion, 79% of assets) unfavorably to Chandler and Gilbert. He called for the city to stop relying on utility fund transfers to cover general fund deficits.
Kathy Carlson (District 5 resident) criticized the city for 17 consecutive years of deficit spending and called on council member Goforth to vote no on the budget, noting her voting record showed no fiscal opposition.
Mark Kimball (Mesa resident) referenced the Elevate Mesa framework and asked whether the budget meets its standards of transparency, measurable progress, and fiscal sustainability. He requested a specific year when the general fund will balance without drawing from savings.
Mary Mabineau (District 5 resident) argued that the deficit is due to overspending, not reduced revenue, and that the utility transfer has grown to $157 million. She urged the city to live within its means.

Discussion Items

City Manager Scott Butler responded to public comments, stating that the budget deficit was caused by the state legislature cutting revenue sources (e.g., flat tax, rental tax, incorporation). He emphasized that the city has robust reserves and has made $56 million in cuts over three years. He characterized the budget as fiscally conservative and transparent, and noted that the city maintains AAA/AA bond ratings.
Brian Richel (Director of OMB) presented actuals showing that in four of the last five fiscal years, the city ended with a surplus (e.g., $76.6 million in FY2021, $34.7 million in FY2023, $27.8 million in FY2024, $16.8 million in FY2025). He explained that the budget is a maximum expenditure limit required by state law, and that actual spending is often lower (e.g., only $297 million of $700 million budgeted CIP was spent).
Council member Taylor shared her struggle with understanding the budget due to a personal loss and said she would vote but acknowledged she still had gaps in knowledge. She thanked staff for their transparency.
Council member Goforth explained that the budget process is ongoing and that the council governs throughout the year, not just on the final vote. She noted that the budget is a plan and that every major expense comes back for council approval.
Council member Adams supported the budget as a step in the right direction, acknowledging improved communication with the new city manager and noting that the budget moves toward balance faster than previous forecasts.
Council member Duff emphasized the importance of quality-of-life programs (parks, libraries, arts) and warned against draconian cuts. She highlighted that the city has not increased sales tax or utility rates significantly.

Key Outcomes

The council approved the Fiscal Year 2026-27 budget and secondary property tax levy (item 1B) on a motion. The vote passed (no specific tally given, but no dissenting votes were noted).
The meeting was adjourned after the vote.

Note: The date of the meeting per the transcript is June 1, 2026, but the instruction specifies to use the date 2026-06-02 03:40:55+00:00. The title and summary use June 2, 2026.

Meeting Transcript

Next, uh, thank you for staying with us. Welcome to the special council meeting on June 1st, 2026. All council members are present. First, we'll conduct a public hearing on the proposed fiscal year 2026-27 budget and proposed secondary fiscal year 2026-27 property tax levy. I declare the public hearing open. Miss Mosley, do you have any requests to speak from the public? And the blue cards that you received are all I've received. These this is everyone? Yes. Okay. All right. First, we'll start with I'm just how they were handed to me. Mr. Winstanley, uh, you're first. And followed by on deck is uh Dennis Miller. Mr. Miller, you're on deck after Miss Wins Mr. Winstanley. And Mr. Miller, if you'd like to come to the front. I don't know where you're sitting at, but anyway, you can come to the front if you like. David. Good evening again, Mayor, Council members and staff. My name is David Wynn Stanley. I live in District 6 near Eastmark. I would like to make three comments regarding the budget you are about to pass. The first is to thank you both the city council and city staff for listening to us and responding to our comments. Thank you for holding three community sessions very early. And while there wasn't great attendance of these, our community was impressed that you made the trip all the way out to talk to us. Thank you for understanding specifically our concerns regarding the structural deficit and addressing it sooner than had previously been planned. It is the sign of a great city when citizens feel like their voices are heard and responded to. Secondly, may I ask you as the city council to ask the question more often is this within the budget, or is it an increase or a decrease? I have heard this asked, but suggesting perhaps more often. For example, in recent presentations in study sessions on the budget, the transit budget was mentioned for being the source of increased spending due to changes between Prop 400 and Prop 479, but it was not mentioned at all during the discussion in the January council meeting. Next week you will be asked to approve a $2.4 million increase in transit spending over the prior year, even though you just approved something in January. Is that increase justified? Lastly, I would like to ask you to remain vigilant on how our tax dollars are spent. You have the subject on your priorities under uh council strategic driver of intentional government and transparency and in the city operational priorities of effectiveness and efficiency. Using the transit system again as an example, uh according to Valley Metro's website, the Fairbox recovery for transit is five percent. That means the subsidy is 95% of all the bus rider cost. Saying it another way, every time a bus rider steps on the bus, we taxpayers are charged $13. Valley Metro ridership data suggests that the downtown buzz carries seven passengers on a 23 passenger bus. I know these are averages and details, uh and the details matter. I'm just asking that they be looked at as an example of the details of how our money is spent. I understand from Transit Director Jody Sorrel, who is an excellent, wonderful person, helped me a lot, uh, that there are bus network redesigns about to come from Valley Metro, um, but there's no mention of it in the county council report. Um, and so I'm simply asking that we look into it in detail as the budget goes forward. Thank you for your time and thank you for your service to your community. Thank you, David. Dennis. After Dennis, we have a Tony McElpray.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com