A proposed budget for the city’s 2011-12fiscal year indicates a decrease in revenues and expenditures andincludes an increase in fees for some city services.

    City Clerk Mike Jinks presented a budget draft to aldermen at awork session held Tuesday night. The draft is not a final documentbut intended to provide the aldermen with a framework fordiscussion.

    The proposed budget would increase by 50 cents per month per userthe city’s water, sewer and garbage fees. City leaders prefer toregularly increase those rates by small amounts rather than waituntil significant increases become necessary, Jinks said.

    In the general fund, the budget projects $9,620,500 in revenue, adecrease of approximately $1.3 million from the current budget.

    It also projects $10,545,772 in expenditures. That is a decrease of$287,346.85 from the current budget, but falls at $925,272 morethan projected revenue.

    Though the city is required to operate with a balanced budget,revenue and expenses do not have to equalize on the budget sheet,Jinks said. Surplus from the current year can be carried over tocover any deficits.

    “I still want to get that number down, though,” Jinks said of theprojected deficit prior to the addition of any surplus.

    Jinks could not estimate what the city’s surplus for the currentyear will be, but hopes to have a clear idea by the end of themonth.

    Once he has an accurate estimate of this year’s surplus, Jinks willknow how far over revenue projected expenses can fall.

    The city’s deadline to pass a budget is Sept. 15. The board hopesto pass one at its Sept. 6 meeting, the last board meetingscheduled before the deadline.

    With a potential budget in hand, aldermen staked out theirpositions on certain items, beginning with pay raises and healthbenefits for city employees.

    Ward Six Alderman David Phillips stated his opposition to a 3percent wage increase for all city employees included in theproposed budget. Under the current budget, all city employeesreceived a 5 percent increase.

    “If we grant the pay increase, we either have to lose some peopleor we’re going to have higher costs per employee,” Phillips said.”I would not be in favor of raising wages at this time after theincrease last year.”

    Ward Four Alderman Shirley Estes voiced support for a wageincrease, but said it should be less than 3 percent and thataldermen should be exempted from any raises.

    Ward Five Alderman D.W. Maxwell disagreed.

    “I am for an across the board, no one excluded, wage increase of1.5 percent,” he said.

    Ward Three Alderman May Wilson agreed pay raises should include allcity employees, including aldermen.

    Phillips also expressed opposition to a vision insurance plan foremployees the city board has considered. The plan would cost 81cents per employee per month and cover one annual exam for eachemployee.

    “My concern is the benefit creep. Will we approve the full plannext year? I am going to oppose it even if I sound like a Scrooge,”Phillips said.

    Maxwell has supported the vision plan since it was firstdiscussed.

    “I understand David’s point about things going up and up, but forthe cost we need to take it,” Maxwell said of the vision insuranceplan.

    The other aldermen appeared undecided or ambivalent as to theinsurance.

    Finally, the much-contended issue of paving funds returned fordiscussion.

    “I’m not voting for this budget unless the paving situation getsunder control,” Maxwell said.

    Comparing actual disbursements of paving to an equal division offunds among the six ward aldermen Maxwell said he reckons he lost$20,000.

    “I want that $20,000 made up, and I want another $20,000 if we’regoing to continue dividing it the way we’ve been dividing it,” hesaid.

    Mayor Les Bumgarner agreed to allow his share of the paving fundsto be divided to all the aldermen, but insisted that Alderman atLarge Karen Sullivan continue to receive a share of thosefunds.

    Another work session for budget discussion is scheduled for Aug. 30at 6 p.m.