Council seeks clarity on parks funds and $2 per-bill surcharge after budget questions

5935822 · August 18, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council members and staff asked for clearer accounting of multiple parks revenue streams — the $2 per water-bill surcharge, voluntary donation funds, CIP allocations and general-fund maintenance — and directed staff to present consolidated fund balances and a clearer process for parks-board recommendations.

La Marque council members used the budget workshop to press staff for clearer accounting of several distinct revenue streams that support parks work: maintenance and operations (M&O) from the general fund, the city—s voluntary one-dollar donation program, a $2 per water-bill park surcharge, and project funds in the capital-improvement program (CIP).

Mayor Pro Tem and several council members asked why the $2-per-water-bill surcharge did not appear in the draft budget summaries shown in the meeting packet. Staff said the surcharge is typically tracked as special revenue and noted the packet included the line in a different section; the city manager said she would confirm and return with reconciled numbers.

Parks board members and a parks liaison explained the customary uses for each pool of money: the M&O general fund covers routine maintenance such as mowing and bench repair; the voluntary donation fund (resident contributions) is generally used for small equipment and event support; the CIP covers larger capital repairs and replacement (for example, major playground or field work); and the $2-per-bill surcharge was originally intended to accumulate toward a larger parks overhaul and to act as a local funding match for grant applications.

Council asked staff to present the consolidated fund balances and to make the parks-board recommendation and expenditure process more transparent and consistent. "Let's allocate the $20,000 and have them identify uses and come back with a list," one council member suggested; staff indicated they would carry forward a park-project allocation and could increase the council-allocated amount if the council wished.

Council also asked for quarterly updates from boards and departments so council can track progress on projects funded from these special revenue sources.