City management proposed creating a centralized communications division for FY26 that would include four positions — a communications director, a communications specialist (repurposed from the existing public information officer), a digital content specialist and a project engagement specialist. The manager’s office said the request is designed to address decentralized communications, expand public engagement capacity for capital projects, and improve digital content and visitor‑industry messaging.

The manager’s proposal would repurpose existing staff where possible and charge portions of new positions’ time to capital projects and passenger fee funds: roughly 20% of hours would be billed to capital projects and 20% to passenger fees, the presentation said. The GF request to start the division was $250,000; ongoing personnel costs were estimated at just under $150,000. A one‑time website redesign was also proposed; the manager’s office said the city’s current site is difficult to maintain and the redesign would be accompanied by changes to content workflows to enable departmental content owners to update pages.

Why it matters: proponents told the AFC they expect more consistent public outreach and better project‑level engagement — for instance providing plain‑language one‑pagers and improved online findability — and that the division could reduce the need to pay outside consultants for routine project outreach. Some Assembly members asked for additional detail on recurring commodities and service costs before committing to the ongoing budget increase.

Staff and funding mechanics: the manager indicated the request would fold the current public information officer into the new unit, and shift grant‑manager hours currently considered in engineering to the communications division. Staff also said the visitor industry (passenger fee revenue) would pay a portion of some shared communications time for tourism‑related messaging.

Next steps: management said it would follow up with a more detailed commodities and services budget to show which existing line items would be consolidated and what new subscriptions, software or printing costs might be required. Assembly members sought clearer goals and metrics tying the positions to measurable improvements (faster response, more public engagement events, content production metrics) before committing to a permanent increase.

Ending: The proposal was presented as part of the manager’s proposed budget; the Assembly Finance Committee reserved detailed questions for later in the budget schedule and said staff should supply a clearer breakdown of permanent vs. one‑time costs.