CITY OF CLINTON
CITY COUNCIL
B...
CITY OF CLINTON
CITY COUNCIL
B...
CITY OF CLINTON
CITY COUNCIL
BUDGET MEETING
FEBRUARY 5, 2026
PRESENT:Maddasion, Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
ABSENT:
1.ROLL CALL
2.PROPRIETARY FUNDS
2.aSewer Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that under capital operating equipment there was $1.5 million that would be transferred out to pay the County, and then the remaining amount would be transferred into the General Fund. Mayor Maddasion confirmed that everyone was tracking where the $1.5 million was going.
Turpen made a motion to approve the Sewer Funds, as presented. Determan seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Turpen
SECONDER:Determan
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.bSolid Waste Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that the proposal would be to add one dollar to the service flat fee and one dollar to the garbage cart fee, which would equate to approximately $192,000 for the capital fund, or would provide flexibility for the Council to move that amount to the general fund if needed. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the revenue would be $192,000 with a $2.00 increase. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether that amount was represented in the revenues in the budget presented. Administrator Brooke stated that the budget had been updated. Councilmember Winter inquired when the rates were last raised. Administrator Brooke stated that the rates had been lowered in 2017 by $2.00.
Mayor Maddasion inquired why the rates had been lowered. Administrator Brooke stated that at the time, the City had raised the sewer rates, so the solid waste rates were lowered to counterbalance the increase. Councilmember Seeley inquired what other changes had been made to the budget besides the rate increase. Administrator Brooke stated that was the only change.
Councilmember Seeley inquired if there were any changes in the expenses. Administrator Brooke stated there were not. Mayor Maddasion inquired what the current fund balance was in the solid waste fund. Administrator Brooke stated that the fund through September 2025 was in the positive. Administrator Brooke stated that as they reviewed the budget, they were not discussing what was left over from prior years. Administrator Brooke stated that surpluses were not taken into account when creating the FY2027 budget.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether the sewer and solid waste funds kept a balance because they were proprietary funds. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Determan stated that raising the rate would give the City the option to purchase another solid waste truck. Finance Director Manrique concurred and added that it would allow the City to purchase it without bonding. Administrator Brooke stated that in the past, the truck would be purchased and the fund would then go into the negative. Administrator Brooke stated that if the proposed changes were accepted, the fund would remain positive.
Mayor Maddasion stated that it was important for him to know what the current balance in the fund was before deciding whether an increase in rates was necessary. Mayor Maddasion stated that he was not opposed to the increase but wanted to see the full financial picture. Councilmember Kearns concurred and inquired whether citizens would be notified before an increase took place. Administrator Brooke stated that it would not take effect until July 1, 2026, and that the process would have to go through a Council meeting to formally approve the rate increase.
Mayor Maddasion noted that the solid waste fund would still end in a positive balance even if the rate increase did not occur. Director Manrique stated that the solid waste budget as of September 2025 reconciled at just over $2 million. Director Manrique stated that he would preface that by saying they were still working to obtain records through January 31, 2026, as there would be additional expenses. Administrator Brooke stated that the Council could approve the budget without the increased rate because, either way, they would need to do a budget amendment if they decided to move forward with the $2.00 increase.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the City was allocating enough expenses to the proprietary fund. Director Manrique stated that they were looking into whether more could be allocated to IT from the account. Director Manrique stated that a portion of his salary and the salaries of other Finance Department employees was pulled from this fund.
Councilmember Seeley stated that he would want the fund's history, including how it had grown and where the funds had been allocated. Councilmember Lee inquired whether there were going to be more upcoming expenses for solid waste this year. Administrator Brooke stated that he did not think so and that they should be okay.
Mayor Maddasion inquired how often solid waste trucks were ordered. Public Works Director Lemke stated that they were good for a few years and that the oldest truck was about seven years old. Director Lemke stated that they would be good for a few more years.
Kearns made a motion to approve the Solid Waste Funds without the $2.00 rate increase. Winter seconded the motion.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the health care insurance increases had been factored into the budget, noting that the amount seemed lower than last year. Director Manrique stated that he had taken the snapshot received from Human Resources based on whichever plans the employees were enrolled in.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Kearns
SECONDER:Winter
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.cMarina Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that the error had been corrected from the February 5, 2026 meeting. Mayor Maddasion inquired whether a portion of Parks and Recreation Director Eggers' salary was allocated from the funds. Director Manrique stated that it was not. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the proposed budget included the potential revenue from renting out the bottom level of the Candlelight. Administrator Brooke stated that it did not.
Councilmember Seeley inquired which line item reflected the revenue percentage that the City received from renting the building. Director Eggers stated that $53,016 represented the standard rent, and the next line item, $63,000, represented the amount received once the renter's gross sales reached $1 million, at which point the City received 6%. Director Eggers stated that the City was able to use those funds toward moving the marina out onto the water, which prevented the need to bond for the project.
Determan made a motion to approve the Marina Amenities Fund and the Marina Operations Fund, as presented. Kearns seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Determan
SECONDER:Kearns
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.dAirport Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that Clinton County would be providing $35,000 to the Airport's FY2027 budget.
Obren made a motion to approve the Airport Capital Fund and the Airport Operations Fund, as presented. Kearns seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Obren
SECONDER:Kearns
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.eTransit Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that the funds in the 551 Fund had proposed revenue of $1.983 million and expenses of $2.5 million, resulting in a net negative balance of $567,603.
Administrator Brooke stated that the fund had been negative for the last few years. Administrator Brooke stated that he could not recall ever discussing the deficit.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the levy had been bought down. Administrator Brooke stated that it had, but the transfer had already occurred. Mayor Maddasion stated that the FY2026 Transit was levied. Administrator Brooke stated that the current proposed FY2027 budget included a $0.37 levy, but if the levy increased by $0.87, it would bring the transit fund back to a positive balance.
Mayor Maddasion stated he would like more information on why the fund was in that position before making a decision. Director Manrique stated that as of September 2025, the transit fund had $93,000 remaining. Councilmember Seeley inquired when the City received funds from the state and federal government. Director Lemke stated they were received quarterly.
Administrator Brooke stated that he wanted to present to the Council what they currently had to date and to inform them that, although a solid budget had been built, the fund was short, and it was up to the Council to determine how they wanted to address the issue.
3.OTHER SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
3.aEngineering Services Fund
Action taken with 3.j.
3.bGaming Fund
Director Manrique stated that the numbers had been updated to reflect similar to FY2025 figures. Councilmember Kearns stated that there could be a new casino being built around the area that may affect the City's revenues.
Councilmember Seeley stated that hopefully the revenues would trend close to the FY2025 numbers. Councilmember Seeley inquired when the next payment would be received. Councilmember Seeley stated he would like to see a history of the gaming fund.
Councilmember Lee inquired if the gaming fund was overbudgeted every year. Councilmember Obren stated that gaming revenue was always late and was received a quarter behind. Director Manrique stated that a large payment was expected in January. Director Manrique stated that another large payment typically came in June. Administrator Brooke stated that it was just a transfer to the general fund. Director Manrique stated that the fund balance was $104,000 as of February 5, 2026.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.cHotel/Motel Tax Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the fund now showed how the items were broken out. Director Manrique stated that last year the revenue was not budgeted for the entire $515,000, so it appeared that only $250,000 had been budgeted. Director Manrique stated it was important to show the full $515,000 and split it out the way it was supposed to be, which included the local match (funds to Grow Clinton), the transfer to the General Fund, and the transfer to Fund 488 (Vision Iowa).
Administrator Brooke stated the Finance Committee laid out the percentages allocated to Grow Clinton, Fund 488, and the General Fund. Administrator Brooke stated he liked the amount of funding going into Fund 488. Mayor Maddasion concurred and stated the City had been able to complete some good projects with the use of those monies.
Councilmember Seeley inquired if the funds had consistently been $515,000. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative and stated that, in the past, they had not been seeing the funds being transferred to Grow Clinton. Councilmember Seeley stated he would be curious to see the history of the Hotel/Motel Fund over the last few years.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.dTIF Taxes Fund
Director Manrique stated whatever revenue the City received from the TIFs were paid right out.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.eTIF LMI Fund
Administrator Brooke stated that 40% of taxes on new homes went toward the Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) Fund. Administrator Brooke stated the fund had to be used for specified purposes. Administrator Brooke stated the City had allocated $40,000 for the roof program and had set aside funds for the YWCA. Administrator Brooke stated the City was very conservative in its projections, meaning they always assumed fewer houses would be built so as not to inflate the numbers.
Mayor Maddasion inquired why the City would budget for a deficit. Mayor Maddasion stated the City should know what was going into the LMI Fund, noting that in FY2024 and FY2025, the fund balances were negative. Administrator Brooke stated it was difficult to look at the fund on a single year basis because the City had previously accumulated a strong fund balance, which allowed transfers to be made as needed.
Mayor Maddasion stated his preference would be not to end the year with a negative balance. Mayor Maddasion stated that if funds were not available, then one of the programs should be affected in terms of reducing the dollars awarded. Mayor Maddasion stated he did not want to see the fund continue in a deficit position. Mayor Maddasion added that he liked the programs and did not want them to go away, but operating in a deficit because of them did not make sense.
Administrator Brooke stated he did not believe there was an end date for the LMI Fund, meaning the funds could remain in the account until they were allocated. Mayor Maddasion stated he did not see a reason why monies needed to be left in the fund because they had to be used for a specific purpose.
Councilmember Kearns stated that if she believed there was a chance the LMI Fund would go away, then the time would expire to distribute the remaining funds. Mayor Maddasion stated keeping a small cushion in the fund would be appropriate in case a scenario arose in which the funds were needed.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.f
SSMID Taxes Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the actual FY2026 balance appeared negative because, depending on when a snapshot of the fund was pulled, it might not yet have received a debit or credit.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.gSpecial Assessments Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the Special Assessment Fund covered tree removal and snow removal and that it typically covered itself. Councilmember Seeley inquired how often the City actually recouped those costs. Community Development Director Johnson stated she did not know the exact percentage but noted that starting with the next tax cycle, they would be able to track it more accurately. Director Johnson added that the City also received court fees and vacant and abandoned property fees that were not represented in this fund.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the fund balance was in a good position. Director Johnson stated it was difficult to budget for nuisance cleanups. Director Johnson noted the City fined property owners more than what was paid to contractors. Director Manrique stated that most of the funds came in when property taxes were paid.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.hDemo Fund
Administrator Brooke stated he would like to see $500,000 set aside for the demo fund, but noted this amount could change once the Council reviewed the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and borrowing. Administrator Brooke stated the fund could be challenging because unexpected situations could arise that required the City to demolish a building that was not included in the proposed list for the fiscal year.
Councilmember Kearns stated there were many houses situated between other homes and asked whether, instead of waiting for the City to demolish them, neighboring property owners might be interested in purchasing the houses and performing the demolition themselves. Director Johnson stated this was rare and that most neighbors preferred to wait until the house was demolished by the City. Director Johnson stated there were still some commercial buildings of concern, and those would be expensive to remove because they were constructed of concrete.
Councilmember Obren stated he felt the budgeted amount for demolitions was appropriate. Councilmember Seeley inquired about the balance in the demo fund. Director Manrique stated it was currently $63,500. Councilmember Seeley asked whether, for FY2026, the City had already spent the budgeted $350,000. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the account would remain negative until the next year and whether the deficit amount would simply remain on the books. Director Manrique stated he would look into the matter to determine the exact status. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether, if the City exceeded the demolition budget in FY2026, the funds allocated for FY2027 would be reduced by that overage. Mayor Maddasion stated the demo fund was generally supported by GO Bonds, so the account would remain negative until the next GO Bond issuance.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.i
HUD Grant Fund
Action taken with 3.j.
3.j
Local Option Sales Tax Fund
Administrator Brooke stated they were conservative with the Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) revenue projections. Administrator Brooke stated they had budgeted $4.1 million. Councilmember Seeley inquired what would happen if the fund came up short. Administrator Brooke stated they could backfill it with General Fund dollars.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the FY2026 actual year to date reflected six months. Director Manrique answered in the affirmative. Councilmember Seeley stated the City was trending lower. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether there was a seasonal factor that played a role. Director Manrique stated that when reviewing FY2025 in December, the City was actually a little higher this year compared to the same period last year.
Turpen made a motion to approve all the other special revenue funds, as presented. Winter seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Turpen
SECONDER:Winter
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
4.ROAD USE TAX FUND
4.aRoad Use Tax Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the Road Use Tax Fund was lower than FY2026. Administrator Brooke stated the revenue was approximately $4,087,290 and expenses were $4,069,873, leaving a surplus of $17,417. Administrator Brooke stated there had been a surplus in FY2024, a deficit in FY2025, a surplus again in FY2026, and they were proposing a surplus for FY2027.
Administrator Brooke stated that 83.8% of the revenue came from Road Use Taxes, 13.2% was transferred into the fund, and 1.3% came from State Highway Assistance. Administrator Brooke stated the expenses included 58.4% for street maintenance, 21% for engineering salaries, 6% for fleet maintenance, 5.6% for snow removal, 4.1% for traffic signal operations, 3% for right of way maintenance, and 1.8% for bridge improvements.
Administrator Brooke stated pavement markings were already contracted at $156,644.80, and the rural road grading was contracted to $45,000. Administrator Brooke stated that traffic signal maintenance, utilities, and bridge improvement expenses had all decreased.
Administrator Brooke stated the Road Use Tax Fund paid salaries for the Engineering Department and members of Public Works. Administrator Brooke stated the City levied for their benefits. Administrator Brooke noted that the City used to levy those benefits out of the Road Use Tax Fund, but that practice was changed so more of the fund could be used on street work.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether the full time street maintenance wages were from the Public Works Department. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative. Mayor Maddasion inquired whether there were eight employees. Director Lemke stated there were eight employees and one supervisor.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether road repair expenses came out of the fund. Engineer Craft stated those expenses came from the engineering budget under road improvements. Engineer Craft stated this included crack sealing and some alley projects. Engineer Craft noted that $450,000 of the fund went toward Alliant Energy bills for streetlights, representing 11% of the Road Use Tax Fund budget.
Councilmember Lee inquired whether that rate could be negotiated. Engineer Craft stated that replacing the lights with LEDs had reduced the fees, but it might still be worth discussing with Alliant Energy. Engineer Craft stated some cities placed a streetlight tax on their garbage pickup bills.
Councilmember Turpen inquired what the line item for donations covered. Director Manrique stated he would look into it.
Determan made a motion to approve the Road Use Tax Fund, as presented. Lee seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Determan
SECONDER:Lee
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
5.DEPARTMENTAL OPTIMUM STAFFING LEVEL REQUEST
Administrator Brooke stated the list provided was from last year and reflected positions funded out of the General Fund. Administrator Brooke stated he was not recommending any new hires but wanted to show all the positions added over the last three years that were funded by the General Fund.
Councilmember Seeley inquired about the Human Resources Director position for the upcoming budget season. Administrator Brooke stated it would be up to the Council to decide at a later time. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether there was a placeholder for the position in the budget. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Administrator Brooke stated there was still a need for many different roles in various departments.
6.ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Kearns moved to adjourn to 3:00 P.M. February 12, 2026. No second or roll call taken.
City Clerk
Published: February 17, 2026
CITY OF CLINTON
CITY COUNCIL
BUDGET MEETING
FEBRUARY 5, 2026
PRESENT:Maddasion, Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
ABSENT:
1.ROLL CALL
2.PROPRIETARY FUNDS
2.aSewer Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that under capital operating equipment there was $1.5 million that would be transferred out to pay the County, and then the remaining amount would be transferred into the General Fund. Mayor Maddasion confirmed that everyone was tracking where the $1.5 million was going.
Turpen made a motion to approve the Sewer Funds, as presented. Determan seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Turpen
SECONDER:Determan
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.bSolid Waste Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that the proposal would be to add one dollar to the service flat fee and one dollar to the garbage cart fee, which would equate to approximately $192,000 for the capital fund, or would provide flexibility for the Council to move that amount to the general fund if needed. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the revenue would be $192,000 with a $2.00 increase. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether that amount was represented in the revenues in the budget presented. Administrator Brooke stated that the budget had been updated. Councilmember Winter inquired when the rates were last raised. Administrator Brooke stated that the rates had been lowered in 2017 by $2.00.
Mayor Maddasion inquired why the rates had been lowered. Administrator Brooke stated that at the time, the City had raised the sewer rates, so the solid waste rates were lowered to counterbalance the increase. Councilmember Seeley inquired what other changes had been made to the budget besides the rate increase. Administrator Brooke stated that was the only change.
Councilmember Seeley inquired if there were any changes in the expenses. Administrator Brooke stated there were not. Mayor Maddasion inquired what the current fund balance was in the solid waste fund. Administrator Brooke stated that the fund through September 2025 was in the positive. Administrator Brooke stated that as they reviewed the budget, they were not discussing what was left over from prior years. Administrator Brooke stated that surpluses were not taken into account when creating the FY2027 budget.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether the sewer and solid waste funds kept a balance because they were proprietary funds. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Determan stated that raising the rate would give the City the option to purchase another solid waste truck. Finance Director Manrique concurred and added that it would allow the City to purchase it without bonding. Administrator Brooke stated that in the past, the truck would be purchased and the fund would then go into the negative. Administrator Brooke stated that if the proposed changes were accepted, the fund would remain positive.
Mayor Maddasion stated that it was important for him to know what the current balance in the fund was before deciding whether an increase in rates was necessary. Mayor Maddasion stated that he was not opposed to the increase but wanted to see the full financial picture. Councilmember Kearns concurred and inquired whether citizens would be notified before an increase took place. Administrator Brooke stated that it would not take effect until July 1, 2026, and that the process would have to go through a Council meeting to formally approve the rate increase.
Mayor Maddasion noted that the solid waste fund would still end in a positive balance even if the rate increase did not occur. Director Manrique stated that the solid waste budget as of September 2025 reconciled at just over $2 million. Director Manrique stated that he would preface that by saying they were still working to obtain records through January 31, 2026, as there would be additional expenses. Administrator Brooke stated that the Council could approve the budget without the increased rate because, either way, they would need to do a budget amendment if they decided to move forward with the $2.00 increase.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the City was allocating enough expenses to the proprietary fund. Director Manrique stated that they were looking into whether more could be allocated to IT from the account. Director Manrique stated that a portion of his salary and the salaries of other Finance Department employees was pulled from this fund.
Councilmember Seeley stated that he would want the fund's history, including how it had grown and where the funds had been allocated. Councilmember Lee inquired whether there were going to be more upcoming expenses for solid waste this year. Administrator Brooke stated that he did not think so and that they should be okay.
Mayor Maddasion inquired how often solid waste trucks were ordered. Public Works Director Lemke stated that they were good for a few years and that the oldest truck was about seven years old. Director Lemke stated that they would be good for a few more years.
Kearns made a motion to approve the Solid Waste Funds without the $2.00 rate increase. Winter seconded the motion.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the health care insurance increases had been factored into the budget, noting that the amount seemed lower than last year. Director Manrique stated that he had taken the snapshot received from Human Resources based on whichever plans the employees were enrolled in.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Kearns
SECONDER:Winter
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.cMarina Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that the error had been corrected from the February 5, 2026 meeting. Mayor Maddasion inquired whether a portion of Parks and Recreation Director Eggers' salary was allocated from the funds. Director Manrique stated that it was not. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the proposed budget included the potential revenue from renting out the bottom level of the Candlelight. Administrator Brooke stated that it did not.
Councilmember Seeley inquired which line item reflected the revenue percentage that the City received from renting the building. Director Eggers stated that $53,016 represented the standard rent, and the next line item, $63,000, represented the amount received once the renter's gross sales reached $1 million, at which point the City received 6%. Director Eggers stated that the City was able to use those funds toward moving the marina out onto the water, which prevented the need to bond for the project.
Determan made a motion to approve the Marina Amenities Fund and the Marina Operations Fund, as presented. Kearns seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Determan
SECONDER:Kearns
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.dAirport Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that Clinton County would be providing $35,000 to the Airport's FY2027 budget.
Obren made a motion to approve the Airport Capital Fund and the Airport Operations Fund, as presented. Kearns seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Obren
SECONDER:Kearns
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
2.eTransit Funds
Administrator Brooke stated that the funds in the 551 Fund had proposed revenue of $1.983 million and expenses of $2.5 million, resulting in a net negative balance of $567,603.
Administrator Brooke stated that the fund had been negative for the last few years. Administrator Brooke stated that he could not recall ever discussing the deficit.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the levy had been bought down. Administrator Brooke stated that it had, but the transfer had already occurred. Mayor Maddasion stated that the FY2026 Transit was levied. Administrator Brooke stated that the current proposed FY2027 budget included a $0.37 levy, but if the levy increased by $0.87, it would bring the transit fund back to a positive balance.
Mayor Maddasion stated he would like more information on why the fund was in that position before making a decision. Director Manrique stated that as of September 2025, the transit fund had $93,000 remaining. Councilmember Seeley inquired when the City received funds from the state and federal government. Director Lemke stated they were received quarterly.
Administrator Brooke stated that he wanted to present to the Council what they currently had to date and to inform them that, although a solid budget had been built, the fund was short, and it was up to the Council to determine how they wanted to address the issue.
3.OTHER SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
3.aEngineering Services Fund
Action taken with 3.j.
3.bGaming Fund
Director Manrique stated that the numbers had been updated to reflect similar to FY2025 figures. Councilmember Kearns stated that there could be a new casino being built around the area that may affect the City's revenues.
Councilmember Seeley stated that hopefully the revenues would trend close to the FY2025 numbers. Councilmember Seeley inquired when the next payment would be received. Councilmember Seeley stated he would like to see a history of the gaming fund.
Councilmember Lee inquired if the gaming fund was overbudgeted every year. Councilmember Obren stated that gaming revenue was always late and was received a quarter behind. Director Manrique stated that a large payment was expected in January. Director Manrique stated that another large payment typically came in June. Administrator Brooke stated that it was just a transfer to the general fund. Director Manrique stated that the fund balance was $104,000 as of February 5, 2026.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.cHotel/Motel Tax Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the fund now showed how the items were broken out. Director Manrique stated that last year the revenue was not budgeted for the entire $515,000, so it appeared that only $250,000 had been budgeted. Director Manrique stated it was important to show the full $515,000 and split it out the way it was supposed to be, which included the local match (funds to Grow Clinton), the transfer to the General Fund, and the transfer to Fund 488 (Vision Iowa).
Administrator Brooke stated the Finance Committee laid out the percentages allocated to Grow Clinton, Fund 488, and the General Fund. Administrator Brooke stated he liked the amount of funding going into Fund 488. Mayor Maddasion concurred and stated the City had been able to complete some good projects with the use of those monies.
Councilmember Seeley inquired if the funds had consistently been $515,000. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative and stated that, in the past, they had not been seeing the funds being transferred to Grow Clinton. Councilmember Seeley stated he would be curious to see the history of the Hotel/Motel Fund over the last few years.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.dTIF Taxes Fund
Director Manrique stated whatever revenue the City received from the TIFs were paid right out.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.eTIF LMI Fund
Administrator Brooke stated that 40% of taxes on new homes went toward the Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) Fund. Administrator Brooke stated the fund had to be used for specified purposes. Administrator Brooke stated the City had allocated $40,000 for the roof program and had set aside funds for the YWCA. Administrator Brooke stated the City was very conservative in its projections, meaning they always assumed fewer houses would be built so as not to inflate the numbers.
Mayor Maddasion inquired why the City would budget for a deficit. Mayor Maddasion stated the City should know what was going into the LMI Fund, noting that in FY2024 and FY2025, the fund balances were negative. Administrator Brooke stated it was difficult to look at the fund on a single year basis because the City had previously accumulated a strong fund balance, which allowed transfers to be made as needed.
Mayor Maddasion stated his preference would be not to end the year with a negative balance. Mayor Maddasion stated that if funds were not available, then one of the programs should be affected in terms of reducing the dollars awarded. Mayor Maddasion stated he did not want to see the fund continue in a deficit position. Mayor Maddasion added that he liked the programs and did not want them to go away, but operating in a deficit because of them did not make sense.
Administrator Brooke stated he did not believe there was an end date for the LMI Fund, meaning the funds could remain in the account until they were allocated. Mayor Maddasion stated he did not see a reason why monies needed to be left in the fund because they had to be used for a specific purpose.
Councilmember Kearns stated that if she believed there was a chance the LMI Fund would go away, then the time would expire to distribute the remaining funds. Mayor Maddasion stated keeping a small cushion in the fund would be appropriate in case a scenario arose in which the funds were needed.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.f
SSMID Taxes Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the actual FY2026 balance appeared negative because, depending on when a snapshot of the fund was pulled, it might not yet have received a debit or credit.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.gSpecial Assessments Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the Special Assessment Fund covered tree removal and snow removal and that it typically covered itself. Councilmember Seeley inquired how often the City actually recouped those costs. Community Development Director Johnson stated she did not know the exact percentage but noted that starting with the next tax cycle, they would be able to track it more accurately. Director Johnson added that the City also received court fees and vacant and abandoned property fees that were not represented in this fund.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the fund balance was in a good position. Director Johnson stated it was difficult to budget for nuisance cleanups. Director Johnson noted the City fined property owners more than what was paid to contractors. Director Manrique stated that most of the funds came in when property taxes were paid.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.hDemo Fund
Administrator Brooke stated he would like to see $500,000 set aside for the demo fund, but noted this amount could change once the Council reviewed the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and borrowing. Administrator Brooke stated the fund could be challenging because unexpected situations could arise that required the City to demolish a building that was not included in the proposed list for the fiscal year.
Councilmember Kearns stated there were many houses situated between other homes and asked whether, instead of waiting for the City to demolish them, neighboring property owners might be interested in purchasing the houses and performing the demolition themselves. Director Johnson stated this was rare and that most neighbors preferred to wait until the house was demolished by the City. Director Johnson stated there were still some commercial buildings of concern, and those would be expensive to remove because they were constructed of concrete.
Councilmember Obren stated he felt the budgeted amount for demolitions was appropriate. Councilmember Seeley inquired about the balance in the demo fund. Director Manrique stated it was currently $63,500. Councilmember Seeley asked whether, for FY2026, the City had already spent the budgeted $350,000. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the account would remain negative until the next year and whether the deficit amount would simply remain on the books. Director Manrique stated he would look into the matter to determine the exact status. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether, if the City exceeded the demolition budget in FY2026, the funds allocated for FY2027 would be reduced by that overage. Mayor Maddasion stated the demo fund was generally supported by GO Bonds, so the account would remain negative until the next GO Bond issuance.
Action taken with 3.j.
3.i
HUD Grant Fund
Action taken with 3.j.
3.j
Local Option Sales Tax Fund
Administrator Brooke stated they were conservative with the Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) revenue projections. Administrator Brooke stated they had budgeted $4.1 million. Councilmember Seeley inquired what would happen if the fund came up short. Administrator Brooke stated they could backfill it with General Fund dollars.
Councilmember Seeley inquired whether the FY2026 actual year to date reflected six months. Director Manrique answered in the affirmative. Councilmember Seeley stated the City was trending lower. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether there was a seasonal factor that played a role. Director Manrique stated that when reviewing FY2025 in December, the City was actually a little higher this year compared to the same period last year.
Turpen made a motion to approve all the other special revenue funds, as presented. Winter seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Turpen
SECONDER:Winter
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
4.ROAD USE TAX FUND
4.aRoad Use Tax Fund
Administrator Brooke stated the Road Use Tax Fund was lower than FY2026. Administrator Brooke stated the revenue was approximately $4,087,290 and expenses were $4,069,873, leaving a surplus of $17,417. Administrator Brooke stated there had been a surplus in FY2024, a deficit in FY2025, a surplus again in FY2026, and they were proposing a surplus for FY2027.
Administrator Brooke stated that 83.8% of the revenue came from Road Use Taxes, 13.2% was transferred into the fund, and 1.3% came from State Highway Assistance. Administrator Brooke stated the expenses included 58.4% for street maintenance, 21% for engineering salaries, 6% for fleet maintenance, 5.6% for snow removal, 4.1% for traffic signal operations, 3% for right of way maintenance, and 1.8% for bridge improvements.
Administrator Brooke stated pavement markings were already contracted at $156,644.80, and the rural road grading was contracted to $45,000. Administrator Brooke stated that traffic signal maintenance, utilities, and bridge improvement expenses had all decreased.
Administrator Brooke stated the Road Use Tax Fund paid salaries for the Engineering Department and members of Public Works. Administrator Brooke stated the City levied for their benefits. Administrator Brooke noted that the City used to levy those benefits out of the Road Use Tax Fund, but that practice was changed so more of the fund could be used on street work.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether the full time street maintenance wages were from the Public Works Department. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative. Mayor Maddasion inquired whether there were eight employees. Director Lemke stated there were eight employees and one supervisor.
Mayor Maddasion inquired whether road repair expenses came out of the fund. Engineer Craft stated those expenses came from the engineering budget under road improvements. Engineer Craft stated this included crack sealing and some alley projects. Engineer Craft noted that $450,000 of the fund went toward Alliant Energy bills for streetlights, representing 11% of the Road Use Tax Fund budget.
Councilmember Lee inquired whether that rate could be negotiated. Engineer Craft stated that replacing the lights with LEDs had reduced the fees, but it might still be worth discussing with Alliant Energy. Engineer Craft stated some cities placed a streetlight tax on their garbage pickup bills.
Councilmember Turpen inquired what the line item for donations covered. Director Manrique stated he would look into it.
Determan made a motion to approve the Road Use Tax Fund, as presented. Lee seconded the motion.
RESULT:Carried 7-0
MOVER:Determan
SECONDER:Lee
YES:Lee, Obren, Seeley, Determan, Turpen, Winter, and Kearns
5.DEPARTMENTAL OPTIMUM STAFFING LEVEL REQUEST
Administrator Brooke stated the list provided was from last year and reflected positions funded out of the General Fund. Administrator Brooke stated he was not recommending any new hires but wanted to show all the positions added over the last three years that were funded by the General Fund.
Councilmember Seeley inquired about the Human Resources Director position for the upcoming budget season. Administrator Brooke stated it would be up to the Council to decide at a later time. Councilmember Seeley inquired whether there was a placeholder for the position in the budget. Administrator Brooke answered in the affirmative.
Administrator Brooke stated there was still a need for many different roles in various departments.
6.ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Kearns moved to adjourn to 3:00 P.M. February 12, 2026. No second or roll call taken.
City Clerk
Published: February 17, 2026
Posted Online 16 hours ago
