Budget and Special Projects Committee Meeting - May 20, 2026
Budget and Special Projects Committee Meeting (May 20, 2026)
The Budget and Special Projects Committee met on May 20, 2026, starting at 1:38 p.m., to discuss the proposed FY2026-27 budget. The meeting featured two primary agenda items: a presentation on the Mayor's Office of Children, Youth, and Families (MOCYF) budget and a broader discussion of councilor-proposed budget amendments and capital plan items. No formal votes were taken; the committee will consider the budget ordinance on June 3, 2026.
Discussion with Mayor's Office on MOCYF Budget
- Deputy Mayor Crystal presented an overview of MOCYF's work, emphasizing that youth outcomes are interconnected with housing, transportation, and public safety. Key data points: nearly 50% of Tulsa families cannot pay for basic needs, 25% of third graders are proficient in reading, and 14% of young adults (18-24) are disconnected from school or work. MOCYF convenes a Children's Cabinet of 35 leaders and five action alliances involving over 100 organizations.
- The funding request for FY27 is $275,000 (flat from FY26), but proposed to be split: approximately $137,500 for a full-time director position (to be hired by end of summer) and $137,500 for a continued contract with Impact Tulsa for data and convening support. Additionally, the office is pursuing a $500,000 grant from a foundation (decision in June) to pilot programs in early literacy, housing stability, transportation, and youth jobs.
- Councilors raised several positions and concerns:
- Councilor Bellas asked about pilot details and timeline; noted support for mental health funding in later discussion.
- Councilor Bangle questioned why participating organizations do not fund the convener themselves, expressing concern about paying for coordination twice and the lack of concrete outcomes. Deputy Mayor and Chief of Staff Mike responded that organizations fund programs, not the infrastructure needed to align them, and that the city's role fills critical gaps.
- Councilor Hull Harper voiced support for the model, citing public health experience and the necessity of a convener. He also raised the state's child care funding cut (from $70M to $7M) as a looming crisis.
- Councilor Dr. Wright asked about data collection and the "Know Your Number" campaign; confirmed it uses aggregate metrics along cradle-to-career milestones. He also noted concern about taking credit for others' work in a press release.
- Councilor Lake asked about the director's job description and hiring timeline; expected by end of summer.
- General tension acknowledged between convener overhead versus direct services, with Councilor Bellas and Councilor Bangle questioning when results will materialize and whether the city's investment is sustainable.
Discussion on Proposed FY2026-27 Budget and Capital Plan with Councilor Amendments
- Councilor Sarah (staff) summarized concepts raised in previous hearings: zoo funding gap ($10-15M), mental health initiatives (911 COPS and forensic ACT team), Route 66 maintenance fund, demolition funds, emergency management costs, Kirkpatrick Heights Greenwood Master Plan adjustment (due to Brown ordinance), personnel/compensation issues, and family safety center operations.
- Councilor Bellas reaffirmed support for mental health funding as a "non-negotiable."
- Councilor Dr. Wright noted that the $80,000 public art master plan will be removed from the budget in technical changes; he expressed frustration about lack of consultation with arts commissioners. He also questioned $300,000 for jail expansion given plans to demolish the facility.
- Emergency management: cost increased from $263,000 (shared with county) to $425,000 (city-only) due to a unilateral decision to split from the county. Councilor Bangle strongly criticized the lack of council input before the split, calling it a "unilateral decision." Councilor Lake suggested using an endowment model for maintenance funds rather than lump-sum bond allocations.
- Councilor Bellas asked about ARPA funds for SafeMove; the last spending date is September 30, 2026, with invoices due in early October. Any unspent funds would need to be reappropriated and spent by year-end.
- Councilor Dutton (likely same as Dr. Wright) suggested leveraging existing data from member organizations rather than paying for new consultants.
- Councilor Lake noted that if the city secures a grant for the Public Safety Center, $10M of that could go to the zoo and $3M to maintenance.
Key Outcomes
- No formal votes were taken. The committee will receive the technical change memo and budget ordinance on June 3, 2026, with potential adoption on June 10 or June 17, 2026.
- Councilors were urged to submit any additional budget amendment requests as soon as possible.
- Staff will provide more details on emergency management cost-benefit analysis, MOCYF director hiring, and SafeMove ARPA fund reallocation options at the next meeting.
- The meeting adjourned at approximately 3:15 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
All right. Welcome to the 1 p.m., which has been now it's the one 38 p.m. uh budget and uh special projects committee meeting. Sorry for the delay getting this started, but our 1030 went over a little bit. Um so item number one, I call this meeting to order two discussion with the mayor's office regarding the proposed FY 2026-2027 budget, historic operational outcomes, private fundraising efforts, and a line item overview of the 2024-2025 and 2025-26 fund utilization for the mayor's office of children, youth, and families. Is the mayor with us? I don't know, you're here the whole time for our last meeting, so I like things that's a short one. I think there's an extra one here for what we're doing. Yes, exactly. And then you have asked you, I think. Or just playing musical chairs, real quick, yeah. Uh it is no one deserves a little careful in the corner. So it's a wonky chair. Alright, good afternoon. Hi, Consular. Thank you so much for for having me. Um, yes, I'm the deputy mayor of the city of Tulsa. And today I'll walk through the items that you shared on the agenda, um, and then provide a little bit more context on the office, um, and then really excited to have this conversation after the TPS conversation and see where there's intersections. Is there's like a radio? Is there an owl outside? Sorry, we're just hearing some kind of noise. It's in there. Oh my god. Thank you. It does sound out. I don't know if we're quite a small. Sorry, Crystal. It's just sorry that tell me you sound like an owl. So my feelings are picking up the radio. No, it does sound like there's a bunch of. Sorry, Crystal. We apologize. I was just sorry. It's been a long morning. Yeah, well, do you want to jump right in? Are we? Yeah, wait, yeah. We're ready. Let's go. The cats have exited the building, so yeah. Okay. Okay. Well, I thought I'd start with um this slide just to illustrate um how we really are thinking about youth outcomes as interconnected with the rest of our priorities that we've been talking about, you know, for the last two years. Um, and I think that's something we all agree on. Um, the kind of really top of mind ones that we talk about a lot is really a child that isn't housed, can't focus on school. Um family financial stability directly impacts housing stability, um, and then a community that uh does not experience public safety. Um, it's difficult to navigate walking to school or tracking investment or trying to get to jobs. And so I really wanted to start with that, but um, I kind of I don't see youth outcomes as a separate initiative or a separate priority. It really is an interconnected priority with everything that we've been talking about. Um, and so to tackle or to address, you know, the the experience the kind of challenge we have with with achieving student outcomes or improving student outcomes, and I'm talking about student outcomes for the whole city, right?
openpublica.com