Lewiston council tentatively agrees to tap $1.95M from reserves, seeks spending cuts and staffing controls

At a budget workshop on April 23 the Lewiston City Council signaled preliminary approval to reduce the finance director's recommended general fund reserve from 10% to 9% to free roughly $1.95 million to lower the coming tax levy, while insisting that any use of reserves be paired with spending reductions or replenishment plans.

Director Roy told the council that lowering the reserve to 9% would make about $1.95 million available and that the finance recommendation is to keep a 10% reserve for stability; she emphasized that one-time fund-balance withdrawals should be used for capital or one-time costs rather than ongoing operations.

Several councilors urged administration to identify equal-sized spending reductions to accompany the reserve drawdown. "If we approve $1.9 million worth of use in fund balance, I would like to see the same amount cut in actual spending," Councillor Martel said, pressing for a mix of one-time savings and structural spending changes to avoid simply drawing down savings to paper over recurring deficits.

Overtime emerged as a primary candidate for savings. Councilors and department heads agreed that public safety and public works overtime are driven largely by contractual minimums, storm response and call volume. Fire Chief Conley said the department is contractually required to have 17 firefighters on duty daily and that vacancies and injuries force overtime shifts. Public Works Director Kevin Gagne described unpredictable winter and storm work that can drive overtime, while police leadership noted some flexibility in scheduling but said limited staffing constrains options.

Councillors asked administration to return with targeted proposals: a review of the largest overtime lines, an assessment of what service reductions would follow various overtime-cut scenarios, and a plan for requiring council approval before filling certain vacated positions to help replenish fund balance.

No formal policy was adopted; staff were directed to prepare concrete amendment language and fiscal modeling ahead of the May 5 budget vote.