By Karen Gleason
The 830 Times
Del Rio City Council members approved the city’s Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget during
a special meeting Monday.
The version of the city budget approved by the council includes major transfers from the
city’s enterprise funds to shore up its general fund balance, but does not include a built-in
reduction in the number of city employees, a move that had been recommended by City
Manager Shawna Burkhart during the budgeting process.
Monday night’s meeting began with a public hearing on the city’s property tax rate for
next year. Del Rio residents Bea Vallejo and Stevie Quilo briefly addressed the council
during the public hearing.
Following the hearing, Mayor Al Arreola announced the council would next consider
approval of a city budget for the coming year and recognized Burkhart, who walked to
the podium on the floor of council chambers to speak.
Burkhart told the council, “Thank you all for being here. It has been a long and arduous
task to build our budget, but we are glad to be here tonight to present you a final
proposed budget. We have three drafts for you. Draft #5 is balancing the budget using
enterprise funds and leaving a zero balance for the general fund.”
She added Draft #5 includes no reduction in the number of city employees.
Burkhart briefly described the other two versions on the budget she had presented
previously.
“Draft #5B is not balancing. No reduction in force. We’re not balancing utilizing
enterprise funds. We’re just simply leaving a negative balance, that negative balance
being $1.9 million,” Burkhart said.
“The sixth draft (Draft #6) is doing a reduction in force, but using a three-month phase-
in,” she added.
“There are only two or three things you need to know about Draft #5: Draft #5 basically
is utilizing general fund reserves, going from five months to three months. That’s a one-
time fix, and also using enterprise funds to balance on, which is a one-time fix, and there
will be some capital projects delayed until out years for the enterprise funds, if we go
with Draft #5, and, again, no reduction in force,” Burkhart said.
Burkhart said that ended her presentation and said she could provide council members
with the spreadsheets detailing each of the three budget options.
Arreola asked if there were any questions for the city manager.
Councilman Jesus Lopez Jr. asked if Draft #6 included balancing the general fund, and
Burkhart replied it did not.
“We would leave the general fund balance at negative $1,461,400,” she said.
Lopez asked if leaving the negative balance would affect the city’s ability to borrow
money over the coming year.
“Potentially, yes,” Burkhart replied.
She added, “It is always best to have a zero fund balance in the general fund, but
obviously, we will take a hit, because no matter what, they will notice, when we go
before Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s or Fitch, to get a due diligence rating call for another
debt issuance.”
After Burkhart finished answering Lopez’s question, Councilman Randy Quiñones
signaled he wished to speak and said, “I’m ready to make a motion.”
“I move to adopt the proposed budget version five (Draft #5) for the Fiscal Year 2025-
2026,” Quiñones said.
Councilwoman Ernestina “Tina” Martinez gave the second.
Arreola again asked if there were any questions or concerns.
The mayor asked City Secretary Mari Acosta whether or not the vote needed to be a roll
call vote, meaning each member of the council would be polled individually for his or her
vote, and Acosta replied a roll call vote was required.
Quiñones, Martinez, Arreola, Councilman J.P. Sanchez voted in favor of the motion.
Mayor Pro-tem Jim DeReus, Lopez and Councilwoman Carmen Gutierrez voted against
Quiñones’ motion to approve Draft #5.
There was a brief moment of confusion when Acosta announced that the motion did not
pass, as she believed a “super majority” of council members needed to vote in favor, but
when Burkhart pointed out the budget could be passed on a simple majority, Acosta
announced the motion had passed.
After the vote, Gutierrez indicated she wished to make a comment.
Gutierrez said, “Just to be clear, since it did pass. This is a temporary, no reduction in
force, that’s what was approved, taking all that money from the enterprise funds, that we
will not be able to use next year, and we will be reducing our five-month (reserve) to
three months, and so, that will not be able to be used, and so, next year, we will be in this
boat, and we will not be able to save jobs. . . The employees that are affected need to be
aware of that.”
Gutierrez also said she wished to comment on why she had voted against the motion.
“I believe that our city needs to have financial stability, and in order to continue to grow
economically and in any other way, we need to have financial stability. We already know
that we were downgraded (by one of the rating agencies) once. We are depleting our
reserves from five (months) to three. It is not a permanent fix. And our citizens are
already going to be paying, Oct. 1, higher rates on all the enterprise funds, new fees on
new ordinances, higher rates on existing ordinances,” Gutierrez said.
She added she believes the one-cent city property tax rate increase, which the council
passed later in the meeting, needs to be funneled towards the city’s police officers and
firefighters.
After Gutierrez made her comments, there was a brief discussion about when a council
member could comment on his or her opposition to the motion on the floor, as Arreola
told her that in the future, she needed to make those comments before the vote.
The mayor’s comment prompted a question from DeReus, who asked, “When did that
rule go into effect?”
DeReus, Arreola, Gutierrez and City Attorney Ana Markowski Smith then engaged in a
brief back-and-forth on the issue.
The writer can be reached at delriomagnoliafan@gmail.com
