Huntington Beach reviews proposed FY 2026–27 budget; council sets adoption hearing for June 16

City staff presented the proposed fiscal year 2026–27 budget at a study session that included an all‑funds overview ($590 million in expenditures shown) and a general fund plan of roughly $327 million. Finance staff highlighted key revenue and expenditure shifts, reserve levels and a slate of capital improvement projects.

Key figures and drivers: Acting finance officials said ongoing revenue was estimated at about $488 million with $6 million in one‑time revenue, $57 million in transfers and $39 million from fund balance. The general fund — which supports core public services — was shown at approximately $327 million. Personnel costs remain the largest pressure (about $211 million), and staff cited a $21 million increase in personnel costs for the coming year driven largely by pension and benefit adjustments. The city's available reserves were estimated at about $99 million, equating to roughly 3.64 months of operating expenditures on the proposed budget basis.

Capital and priorities: The proposed capital improvements program totals roughly $46 million and includes water‑system work (well projects, water main replacement), street and paving programs (residential overlay and arterial segments), sewer lining, improvements to parks and beach restrooms, and facility roof and HVAC replacements. Staff emphasized continued investment in infrastructure while seeking operational discipline.

Budget process and next steps: Council voted to receive the proposed budget and set the adoption hearing for June 16, 2026 (previously scheduled for June 2 but extended to allow more review). Staff said department directors will provide follow‑up answers for outstanding questions and that council follow‑up will include additional CIP, staffing vacancy and reserves detail.

What councilmembers asked for: Several councilmembers asked for more detail on vacant positions (city reported ~85 unfilled roles), timing and scope of CIP projects (including community requests about batting cages and marina dock work), and options to preserve reserves while addressing structural deficits tied largely to pension obligations.

Practical note: Staff urged that reserves be viewed as a multi‑year planning tool and discouraged relying on fund balance for ongoing operational costs. Councilmembers discussed potential revenue opportunities to reduce long‑term structural pressures, including strengthening tourism and merchandising initiatives.