WESTMINSTER — A recent budget review for Westminster City Council ended with a discussion on policy considerations related to building the budget.
After looking back at the general, solid waste, youth recreation and hospitality and accommodations tax fund expenditures from the past several years, city administrator Kevin Bronson asked council some pointed questions to help him craft the fiscal year 2024-25 budget.
Council touched on continuing with a 5 percent franchise fee from the utility fund to the general fund — an estimated $410,000 — and keeping the millage rate steady at 95.8 mills, with the value of a mill sitting at $7,118. The city dropped its millage rate down from 99.3 mills for the fiscal year 2023-24 budget.
While assessing the broader budget picture, Mayor Brian Ramey said things will change once incoming growth kicks in.
“The thing we’ve got to hold onto is the additional property taxes we should get next year, seeing all the growth we’re seeing now,” he said.
“Yeah, I think if we get through this fiscal year — the one we’re talking about building this budget — it could be the tightest that we’ve had since I’ve been here, but I really have more an intuitive sense that next year when we’re doing this, we’ve got more to work with,” Bronson replied.
Recreation fund
Several discussions came down to the youth recreation fund having the money it needs and figuring out where to trim to make that happen.
“I’m telling you, we saw the damage that cutting the youth recreation budget did,” Ramey said. “I hate to be harping on that, but it just hurts me that we’re paying as much as we are and the county’s not putting their part into it. That’s the part that just eats me up.”
For the current fiscal year, the recreation fund’s revenue sources as budgeted are: General fund transfer —$119,099, hospitality tax fund transfer — $117,950, and fees and other — $342,270.
According to statistics from the Westminster Recreation Department for the 2022-2023 season, 84 percent of participants from all sports combined were from outside the city limits. Broken down, that was 84 percent of soccer participants, 89 percent of football participants, 82 percent of basketball participants and 83.5 percent of baseball and softball participants combined.
“If you take our (FY24) budget that’s in youth rec, you take that $579,000 and you look at what’s 80 percent of that,” Bronson said. “$464,000 of that goes to non-city participants, so very little of what we put in is actually serving city residents versus serving county residents.”
Hospitality taxes
The discussion around allocating HTAX revenues also turned toward recreation. The hospitality fund has approximately $200,000 in recurring revenue, according to Bronson. The current fiscal year also included a $284,000 fund balance appropriation that will be spent down before FY25, he added.
The FY24 expenses included transfers to the general and recreation funds, along with designations for downtown improvements, Christmas decorations, recreation projects and local agency grants.
“If you said, ‘Kevin, go do this the way you would do it,’ I would take that $200,000 (for FY25), I’d split it between general fund and youth rec and call it a day,” Bronson said. “It doesn’t just hurt those local agencies not getting their grants, it also cuts into some of these other things that we’ve been doing. Because you see down here, (Yousef Mefleh Memorial Fields) and Hall Road (Recreation Complex) — those are things that go directly to youth rec already that we’re not going to be funding.”
“But those things are long term investments, too, they’re not a one-time deal,” Ramey countered. “Events are important to the community, so having events is necessary — it’s just how much we fund them and what’s going to be cut this year.”
He added HTAX tax revenue was affected by one restaurant closing permanently and another being temporarily closed for repairs.
After some debate and discussion, council determined the best place to trim was the local agency grants, which are $40,000 for the current year. Some council members expressed fears the city would lose the events if it didn’t give out the grants.
Councilwoman Audrey Reese said good communication might prevent that.
“(S.C. Apple Festival) had about a $10,000 surplus last year, and we gave them $10,000 (in grant money),” she said. “And they gave it away, I’m not saying they misused it, but I’m just saying … I don’t think we’re gonna lose Apple Festival if we just talk to people. I don’t think we’ll lose Bigfoot (Festival) if we just talk to people and explain.”
Bronson again referenced the unusually tight budget.
“We’re growing, and because of that, we’ve got cash flow is down,” he said. “It may be lean next year, (but) because we’re growing, the next year we’re getting back to where we were.”
akelley@upstatetoday.com | (864) 973-6681
