A Finance Committee Update - October 2025
I am not a member of the current Finance Committee, and they normally only meet in the fall to review the annual budget and sometimes in the spring to review any needed adjustments. This year, the finance committee has met at least 4 times, starting in late August or early September.
Initially their recommendations regarding a partner of the city’s differed significantly from the recommendations of the Arts & Culture Committee. During a flurry of calls and conversations, we all agreed that it would be wise to table some legislation that would fund that partner. We needed more time to get onto the same page.
This is one of the things that our current council members do – we talk with each other about decisions where we disagree. In this specific scenario, I met with 2 of the committee members to hear their perspectives and discuss common ground. Our city staff are also good creative problem-solvers who offered ideas. Ultimately, we came to an agreement that accomplished everyone’s goals, and we voted on that legislation in our October council meeting.
One of the results of these particular conversations is that I’ve noticed council members visiting each other’s committees more often. We have all recognized the value of hearing the conversations firsthand. This past week, I attended a Finance Committee meeting, where staff reviewed the city’s capital improvement budget with the committee.
The following represents my personal understanding and summary of the conversations only, and not that of anyone else on council or in the city staff. You may also notice these notes are more detailed than some of my others. I’m not allowed to speak in a committee meeting where I’m not officially a member. This means I could focus on taking notes, which is much easier when you’re not participating in the discussion.
If you have questions or comments, please feel free to email me or contact any of the Finance Committee members.
Finance Committee Members: vice mayor Ashley Chance, council members Josh Styrcula (chair) and Scott Gibson
2026 Capital Fund Budget Review
Summary/Overview
Strong balances. We have plenty of capital in the bank, in spite of investing a large amount into tennis. (Staff called it a “generational investment in tennis” of $35M in FY2024). That year, the total capital spend was $55M; in a normal year we try to spend more more than $20M.
Strong interest earnings. These strong balances allow the city to invest in opportunities that are impossible to budget for/predict (like tennis or purchasing key pieces of property).
Larger trajectory: need to return to regular capital spend. Time will assist with rebuilding balances so we have the extra we need for generational investments when they come up. If the national economy stays strong, Mason will continue to have strong economic performance.
To date, we have put back in $6M to the core balance. If everything goes as predicted with no new opportunities, we can put an additional $6M back this next year.
Our policy is to not spend until we have it. Want to keep the balance of capital spend around $20M. 2024 was a once in a lifetime investment of an additional $35M.
Street fund is taking a hit in 2025. The funds are there, and we’ll be using them on some major road projects.
Projects
Staff presented several pages of capital budget updates. The items marked with * had additional commentary or discussion needed, which I have noted below. (The actual capital budget document has many more items than listed here.)
Carryover
(Budgeted for this year but not spent)
Parks Master Plan - This is on the docket for early 2025. $400k. Need to get what we have up to Mason standards. Intended to identify needs, partnerships, etc. Need to take the time to do this right, including getting public comment, so it won’t be completed until end of 2027.
City website update and redesign - $250k. Onboarding new employee in Public Information Office, will look at doing this in 2025. Maintaining the city’s site will likely need annual investments going forward. It’s complicated because several platforms integrate into the site. The $250k budgeted is for the site itself, not for new systems that integrate. Those are very expensive (for example, tax filing, registering for classes).
Prior Council approval
Some carryover items have already received approval. One:
Snider Rd widening (Western Row to US 42) - received a $1M grant from OPWC for this, will start it next year. Total $3.25M
Discussion Items
Downtown development contingency: $2M (placeholder). Many priorities identified, anticipating opportunities unearthed.
E Church St Parking Lot Expansion - construction: $1.5M. Contract has been awarded, surveying started for design completion.
Mason Mile Downtown East Design (Phase 1 intersection - MM/42, Phase 2 streetscape) $1.3M (Someone brought up Mark Haake’s tunnel idea here.)
Kings Mills Improvement Main to bridge - design $200k. Trying to get OPWC funding for construction, hoping having the design done will score better.
Downtown Stormwater assets survey - stormwater $100k (records are sketchy for downtown, need to get updated info in GIS to make better decisions)
Gould Park - Phase 1 Construction ($1M). Nov agenda will have funding for overall concept development (up to 5 concepts with actual dimensions) + detailed design for Phase 1 construction. This Phase 1 Construction budget is for the first project (likely including a turn lane and a shared use path from Main to Rock Garden Court)
Ashley Chance expressed a major problem with the construction element of this. He said Heritage Oak Park should be a higher priority. Did a modular design for restrooms years ago, then prefab building but never installed them. Currently, it’s portolets. Wants other priorities put before the construction (design ok). “It’s just about someone’s back yard being beautified.”
Staff stated that they have budgeted for a Heritage Oak reinvestment master plan for 2027. They also said community members want to see funds identified for construction for Gould Park.
The committee discussed timing of master planning for parks and where this construction project fits. Staff said they won’t actually start Gould Park construction until after 2027 when park master plan is done. It’s a similar scenario as identifying the E Church parking need while the downtown master plan process is still happening. Need to ensure they don’t get ahead of the master planning process.
The committee decided to move this item to the Future Considerations/deferred section. The park construction is needed, justified, and the funds are allocated, but realistically now isn’t the time to do it. They want to do things well and at the right time - once we have a master plan in place.
Legacy Park PUD signage - branding it “legacy park”. want to time this with moving the pro shop to the new place, so it’s all rolled into one big announcement. (This is the name of the whole campus where tennis and golf live - the street is now Legacy Park Way)
Asset management plan of existing storm system - whole city (not just downtown)
Golf course: restroom replacement $250k. Many things here need to happen but aren’t exciting to golfers. Restrooms are a new tangible amenity. Discussed how happy people will be when the new pro shop and restaurant open.
2027 budget or deferred maintenance
Fire station $18M
Downtown dev $6M
Foxfield Dr construction $3.5M
Heritage Oak Reinvestment $1.5M
Municipal bldg basins mods $1.1M
Service Center roof $1M
Sport park playground replacement $450k
Future considerations (beyond 2027)
Golf course infrastructure $2M
Makino Park parking $1M
Aquatic center parking $850k
Sewer for restroom near hole 1
Gould park construction Phase 1 (moved from above)
2026 Other Capital
Desperately need to update the comprehensive plan ($50k) but not sure if we can make the time to do this next year. Need this for grant purposes. Corporation lines, thoroughfare map, all of these need to be updated.
