Syracuse IT Department Budget Hearing - April 22, 2026
Syracuse IT Department Budget Hearing - April 22, 2026
The Syracuse Common Council held a budget hearing for the Information Technology (IT) department on April 22, 2026. IT leadership discussed staffing shortages, reliance on external consultants, a position transfer from Parks, and increased cloud computing costs. Councillors questioned significant budget line increases and hiring challenges.
Discussion Items
- IT reported losing two staff over three years without replacement, citing higher pay and no residency requirements at the county and school district as obstacles. A recent salary adjustment improved competitiveness but hiring remains difficult.
- A LAN technical support specialist position transferred from the Parks Department to Central IT, adding approximately $65,000 in personal services costs.
- Total personal services increased $181,000 year-over-year, mainly from the Parks transfer and salary adjustments.
- Utilities and operating expenses rose $280,000: $70,000 for a new cloud-based phone system for the consolidated police/fire building (1153 Spencer Street) and the remainder from centralizing cell phone bills.
- Operating supplies and expenses jumped from $58,000 in FY25 to $654,000 in FY26. IT explained this reflects proper accounting: Azure cloud computing (~$120,000/year), Microsoft 365 ($300,000/year, previously spread across departments), and disaster recovery/backup costs. Councillors pressed on the sharp increase; IT noted this shift from capital to operational expenses as on-premise servers are phased out.
- Professional services decreased significantly after completing the Microsoft 365 migration from on-premise email to cloud.
- A "to be determined" unfunded position remains; a prior meeting's zeroing out was a typo in the budget book.
- IT leadership acknowledged heavy reliance on external consultants for baseline functions due to understaffing, which is more costly. They committed to reducing that reliance over the next year by growing the team and better aligning digital services and IT.
Key Outcomes
- No formal votes or decisions were recorded; the hearing was an informational budget review.
- IT leaders pledged to make an earnest effort to realign resources and decrease dependence on outside consultants for core IT functions.
Meeting Transcript
So I'm gonna ask you Vinny and you Dave to give us again an overview of the department. Yeah, happy to uh appreciate the opportunity. Uh you can uh as you know, I was just sitting here for API's budget hearing. Uh and as the deputy mayor had explained, uh with the some changes earlier this year. Uh currently working I'm currently working with the digital services and uh IT teams, even though they're a little bit separate at this point. We can get to that conversation in a little bit. Uh but uh I don't think Dave is a new face to you all, and I'll let Dave uh introduce himself, but uh I think just generally you all know that uh um you know IT is a longstanding uh department here that provides what I would describe the special uh in particular as uh functional technology, right? Uh essentially the equivalent of keeping the lights on, I would say uh uh but in a digital sense. So um Dave, morning counselors. Always a pleasure. We're ready for any questions you might have about our budget. Oh, okay, so we're just gonna dive right in. All right, so we're gonna start on page eighty-five. I see uh LAN technical support specialist. There were none, and now you're looking for one, correct? Yep. Well, so uh not necessarily that we're looking for one, but uh this was a transfer that came from the parks department to Central IT, as we'll just call it. So uh it's um I I would say across the the budget overall wouldn't necessarily be reflected as a a new ass for an increase, but shifting uh what was a position uh the same position in parks over to the central IT team to help augment. Several of the larger departments have somebody on their staff in place there that does t IT work. We consider them a part of our group, but they don't show up on the the org chart that way. But this was an example of somebody that came from parks and now is formerly a part of our group. So where are we at? Um we have um well we've lost a couple of people over the last three years, have not replaced them. Uh we are the embodiment of doing more with less, or at least the same with less. It's a challenge. We talked about it here last year too, when there's a job posting, and that same job pays more in the county, and that same job pays more in the school district. And neither of those have the residency requirements we do. That makes hiring a challenge. Yeah. That really helped that really helped close the gap. That really helped close the gap. I think it makes us at the very least competitive. We're now we're in the ball game. But we still have that residency requirement. It may be a big deal for some people and maybe not for others, but that uh salary increase was long overdue. Um the adjustments are across the board, and it gives us a fighting chance now. Before we really didn't. So were we able to pick up anybody from right ways raising the wages? We have not. Technology changes all the time. So we've been able to absorb those workloads with current staff. And we have for a long time and continue to have a relatively a large dependence on some key consultants. That's just how we're built now. In a perfect world, we'd have triple the staff, but we don't. And as Vinny alluded to, we look at ourselves here as the nuts and bolts folks. We got to keep the buses moving. So we have not increased staff since the two departures three years ago. So when we use a consultant, isn't that a more costly way of doing that? I don't I don't disagree. I don't disagree, but at the end of the day, our job is to get to keep the buses moving, so to speak, using that analogy.
openpublica.com