Moline Committee-of-the-Whole 2026-2028 Budget Work Session - October 22, 2025
Moline Committee-of-the-Whole 2026-2028 Budget Work Session - October 22, 2025
This was a budget work session focused on the 2026-2028 operating budgets. The council reviewed property tax levy options, infrastructure funding, and budgets for special funds including cannabis tax, special events, housing, public art, parks, and library funds. Several motions were made to adjust appropriations and fund balances, with final approval of the 2026 property tax levy.
Discussion Items
- Property Tax Levy Options: Staff presented multiple levy rate scenarios. The recommended option reduced the levy rate to $1.703 (capturing 83.95% of EAV growth), resulting in an average annual increase of $37 per residential home ( $3.08/month). Council debated between options that would further reduce the increase (to $27/year) or keep infrastructure funding higher. The final decision aligned with an option that balanced tax relief and infrastructure investment.
- Infrastructure (PCI) Funding: Several council members stressed the importance of maintaining PCI project funding, noting that reducing it prematurely could jeopardize progress on residential streets and the city's infrastructure score. Others advocated for slowing the pace of increases to provide taxpayer relief. Ultimately, the council agreed to keep PCI funding levels unchanged and instead find savings in other areas (contingency funds, parks, library).
- Cannabis Tax Fund: Staff reported the fund had a balance of about $215,000 and had assisted five households since launch. The council approved the cannabis tax fund budget as presented.
- Special Events Fund: Discussion centered on a $100,000 budget for a July 4th celebration. Some council members suggested reducing the amount to $75,000 and seeking sponsorships. A motion to that effect passed.
- Housing Fund: A detailed presentation was made on the proposed housing fund (a revolving loan fund to leverage private capital for affordable housing). Council members expressed concerns about the lack of a fully developed plan, the governance structure, and the appropriate level of city investment. It was noted that the $2 million allocation in the budget is a placeholder; no funds can be disbursed without further council approval. The council agreed to proceed with the allocation to allow further exploration.
- Public Art Fund: The council debated whether to fund the public art program from council contingency or from general fund reserves. A motion to amend the funding source (remove $75k from council contingency, add $75k from general fund reserves) passed after reconsideration.
- Parks and Library Funds: Motions were passed to reduce property tax allocations for both funds: parks by $50,000 and library by $25,000, reflecting unused reserves and ongoing efficiencies.
- General Fund and Contingency Reductions: To achieve the desired property tax levy, the council voted to reduce the council contingency by $170,000 and the city administrator contingency by $25,000.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to remove line 8 (White House shelter fund) from Payments to Agencies: Passed (unanimous).
- Motion to approve the Cannabis Tax Fund budget: Passed (vote not recorded, but approved).
- Motion to reduce the Parks Fund property tax levy by $50,000: Passed (vote not recorded, but approved).
- Motion to reduce the Library Fund property tax levy by $25,000: Passed (vote not recorded, but approved).
- Motion to reduce council contingency by $170,000 and city administrator contingency by $25,000: Passed (5-2).
- Motion to reconsider Public Art Fund and amend to remove $75k from council contingency and add from general fund reserves: Passed (vote not recorded, but approved).
- Motion to approve the 2026 property tax levy for general fund at $17,346,149: Passed (vote not recorded, but approved).
- The $2 million allocation for the Housing Fund was approved as a placeholder, with the understanding that further council approval is required before disbursement.
- The meeting adjourned after completion of all agenda items.
Meeting Transcript
Very small really good. Still away to one thing. So finish line. So standards. And about six oven of it. So you could know that all that are so that's why we're talking about here. So we move to the item number two and following this again. Uh 2026, 2028. Um welcome if you want to be here on Saturday morning. Um twenty-six budget as you are very told and who use property capital and ready something to talk to that I would do, but I think what could be able to use the right communication to the very activities that are in your hand for and then tell you as a means I'm actually going to focus on the very first page and both the 50 pages. I only mentioned the multiple and touch based on all the funds today, and also kind of pulling out the input on the current year of the only five budget because that budget there's kind of not very hard to put in office, which is it would be all these on the business is the one that we started with that very first page. Um the baby test coming up to the all of your major funds that are currently listed in the city's policy unbalances and risk, each and every one of those are within the policy from 25. And if you look at what we call area and uh six year, every single one of those are probably and confident that we're going to put that the staff is helpful as really kept on the only exception that I mentioned on continuous UL is a very circle and maybe fund balance policy just for one year and one eight people. We still have a building value of the fund. Uh year from the phone. And that's totally acceptable in our model even have one value. Any questions on the overall balance of the major funds? So the very next thing we're gonna do, I'm gonna jump right into and obvious the current narrow terms and the main areas is our properties. Um I think this is time for it's uh here's an option. So I'm going to start with your multiplication. And that generates 168 million dollars. Of that, 16.8 million dollars, 787 fund for special C I think. And that's kind of variable ones. That's where we are at today. Then in period option, it was back in the end of August. First part is that really presented an option. What if we were to keep the levy rate frozen? What kind of dollars would we generate? And we went through what would we do if we had those additional funds? But that levy rate that we talked about, for example, again, you can have one dollar point seven hundred would generate seven eight million dollars. And if you look at the yellow line, that's where we were going to focus the original funding up to one million one for the six going through special COP, and that would have increased of about 200 and 500. In the past, we've been talking about trying to put 200 million at that time. This would be a little bit above that, just to do tax perfectly. Um the impact our average residential call would be $44 annually on a monthly basis, three dollars and sixty-seven cents for a total impact, including all of our fees, the utilities, franchise, and costly within 100% dollars, and there would be no increase or reduction in that budget rate during that. So this move forward last two days, bottom line, another option. And you came out with a value's recommendation on the levy rate, and there's where you could say that the levy rate was reduced to a dollar point seven or three, and that is taking approximately eighty-three point ninety-five percent of the GAG growth. As we go down the road then, that levy rate would generate seventeen point six million dollars for an increase of about eight hundred and thirty-seven thousand dollars if you probably thousand point now. The average impact was limited on the annual basis would be thirty-seven dollars operating taxes monthly, three dollars and eight cents for a total of a hundred and ten dollars and twenty cents soldiers and taxes. That would be a growth by nine percent in tax. That is a reduction of levy of a dollar, no one point four cents. So it's one point one cent. That is what this option is the ten dollar annual reduction. We would be captured 56.9% of them to AV row, the levy rate um estimated to drop to one dollar point six seven eight high, and we generally if we were to reduce it at expected, I think that's some of the other levy that we choose, but that's not the one we do two I would bring it down seven eighteen for total marks is seventeen point four the in half variable fee on an annual basis of resolution loans twenty-seven dollars, so that's the difference thirty-seven dollars as recommended down into twenty-seven. The impact on a monthly basis, two dollars and point cents, and it would be a savings to the residents of about eight cents a month. The reduction on an individual home each book though, what is that we sitting on when you call them, and that's going on down the columns. And that's going on down the columns. So city wide, it would be a reduction of 269,000 on the city. And if and again there's various options, if that were to look after only the special CIP fund over 10-year period, we would impact a reduction of about 2.6 million dollars. So I just need to go with that. It would be a reduction of total one three cents, and it's not on the receipt, but that is the total tax events program will drop as we had previously talked about nine dollars and eight cents, it would drop down to eight dollars and third and five cents.
openpublica.com