435 Hamilton Street

Allentown, Pa. 18101

Allentown

Minutes - Final

City Council

Wednesday, December 3, 2025

5:30 PM

Council Chambers

Roll Call

Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated good evening, we are about to begin the

Special Meeting. He asked Mr. Hanlon to please conduct the Roll Call.

7 -

Present:

Cynthia Mota, Daryl Hendricks, Ed Zucal, Natalie Santos, Ce-Ce Gerlach, Candida

Affa, and Santo Napoli

The purpose of this meeting is for information sharing and discussion only. Future

action on the budget will take place on December 10 - a meeting is scheduled at 6 PM to

consider any amendments that might be proposed by any two councilpersons; the

adoption of the budget is scheduled at a meeting that follows at 6:30 PM.

The Administration is prepared to provide us information on the following issues:

1. Alternative property tax and garbage rate proposal - distributive impact of

decreasing the solid waste fee by $25 and retaining the 3.96% tax increase.

2. Cost/Benefits of alternative approaches for Background Checks across the City.

Ms. Bina Patel stated and good evening Councilpersons. She asked to

share the file stating she can't.

Mr. Michael Hanlon asked Ms. Patel which one she wants to share.

Ms. Bina Patel thanked Mr. Hanlon again. He stated that the mayor

touched upon this at the last Council meeting. She stated what they are

proposing is an alternative to what was initially proposed. She stated that

this is a more balanced approach where they can keep the property tax

increase from 3.96 percent which generates a revenue of $1.5 million for

the General Fund. They do see the proposed garbage fee increase by

$25. The current garbage fee proposed is $740. It will be reduced by $25

and brings it down to $715 per unit and what that will do and she will show

the impact of that on the screen that Mr. Hanlon is sharing. She stated what

the proposal is showing is that the bottom-line impact to the taxpayers on

fixed income and limited income is actually less or there is a savings to

them. She stated that it is a second page. She stated what she did was

took property parcels from different -mall over the city and a sample. The

others are showing that the property address in different corners of our city

and blue sections. She stated that you are seeing the property address

there. The blue section is what Council is currently willing to prove. It

shows 2025, city real estate tax which if you are and can you zoom in a little

bit for the first two addresses so she can walk everyone through. She

stated that if they looking at this address of 615 Whitehall Street, the

current proposal is to keep the property tax at 2025 current rate so that

property will be paying, the city real estate tax of $356.23. The garbage

fees are one unit for that property so that current proposal is $740 per unit.

She stated that the total that property will be paying $1,096.23. She stated

that green is a recommended alternate proposal that they are proposing so

the property tax remains at 3.96 percent and that is 2026 increase of 3.96

percent, but new proposals for garbage fees reduction in per unit by $25.

She stated that you will see the new per unit fee is $715 so the total amount

that 615 Whitehall Street will be paying ia $1,085.36. She stated that is a

yearly savings, the $10.87 and per month savings of .91 cents. She stated

again, it was different addresses were taken as a sample of small different

corners of our city and what this is reflecting if you go down to the last

address on there is 795 Benner Street property which is on the west end

and you see the current 2025 rate for that property is $4,606.26 and they

are also and only one unit for that property so they will be paying $740 for

garbage fees. The total amount that they will be paying is $5,346.26. She

stated that the alternate proposal is saying at the 2026 property tax rate

with the increase of 3.96 percent is $4,788.84. Reduction in the garbage

fee of $25 and the new rate is $715 so the total amount that this property

on the west end will be paying is $5,503.84, right. She stated that the

impact to the higher value property is an increase of $157.58 for a year and

per month, is $13.13. She stated that what this scenario is showing you is

a sample is the impact to the property owners on a fixed income and

smaller parcel is either savings or lesser of an impact versus a larger

parcel. She stated that this addresses the concern of our taxpayers that

they cannot afford or maybe it is there are challenges and pay increase that

is proposed. This addresses and reflects that this new proposal is actually

assisting the taxpayers on a smaller parcel, fixed income or limited income.

She stated that she also has Tom Beckett who is the city's Financial

Advisor to help comment on it as well. She stated if Council has any

questions, she will walk them through, but he is here to communicate any

question you have or the same message.

Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated ok, thank you and said Mr. Zucal.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated yes, thank you Mr. president. He stated that you keep

saying $740 and the tax fee is going to be $140.

Mr. Bina Patel stated that this is per unit, total cost per unit is $740.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated ok, so how did we go from $140 with the people

expecting to pay $140 for the contracted rate we had over this five years

and this year is $148. He stated that last year was $85. He stated that he

thinks she is trying to confuse people here by using that $740.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that $740 is per unit, total cost per unit. She stated

that this is not an increase.

Mr. Ed Zucal asked for this year or cost of contract.

Ms. Bina Patel stated no. This is for 2026. She stated that the blue is what

Council is ready to approve which is $740 per unit cost. She stated that if

your property has one unit, the cost for garbage fee collection will be $740.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated but when the mayor did his press release, he projected

that asking for a 3.96 he believes it is for the increase and $140 for the

garbage fee increase.

Ms. Bina Patel stated increase. This is.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated increase so you are saying that you are willing to drop

it down to $115.

Ms. Bina Patel stated drop out down to $715.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated no, no it was initially $140. You wanted to drop it down

to $115 so why from the beginning it was it not $115. What you are do

there is kicking the can down the road. At some point, you are going to

have to make up that $25. Next year or the year after, whatever because

we have a contract. He stated so he remembers when they did the contract

that Mr. Shahda gave them a list of and the contract was that they voted on

it and it was an amount for each year as an example. He stated that last

year, it was $85. Now, you are saying this year it is $140, but you want to

mark it down to $115 which is nice. However, somewhere along the line,

someone is going to pay for that $25.

Ms. Bina Patel stated excellent question stating that what they are planning

to do is loan the Solid Waste Fund, the different between the $740 per unit

and $715. She stated that will be a million dollars that the General Fund

can lend to the Solid Waste Fund and repay over five years. She stated

that would be about $200,000 per year that the Solid Waste Fund will be

repaying the General Fund.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that at the last meeting, the mayor said that and stated

actually referred to him that they needed to make it $140 so that we can

sustain the Solid Waste Fund or it would be sustained, but now you are

saying it is not necessary so his question is why wasn't $115 introduced

initially.

Ms. Bina Patel stated excellent question. She stated what they are

planning to do is loan the Solid Waste Fund the difference between the

$740 per unit and the $715. She stated that will be one million dollars in

the General Fund can lend to the Solid Waste Fund and repay over five

years. She stated that will be about $200,000 per year that the Solid

Waste Fund will be repaying the General.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that at the last meeting, the mayor said that and stated

that he actually referred to him that they needed to make it $140 so they

can sustain the Solid Waste Fund or it would be sustained, but now you are

saying it is not necessary so. He stated that he guesses his question is

why wasn't the $115 introduced initially.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that the amount of money that the Solid Waste Fund

needs to sustain it may be the same. She stated that the General Fund

would lend the difference.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated so you are going to take it out of the General Fund.

Ms. Bina Patel stated lend it for five years.

Mr. Ed Zucal asked the what he remembered that Mr. Glazier talking about

it this last meeting. He stated that it is not appropriate to take anything

from the unappropriated balance whether Council takes it or the city takes

it and yet that is what you are doing here again. He stated that this is a

nice idea. He stated that he appreciates her trying to help the citizens, but

down the road they are going to pay it back anyway.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that it is not a new concept, Councilperson Zucal.

She stated that they have done this in the reverse in the past, in 2017. She

stated that the Solid Waste Fund had lent the General Fund $4.5 million

and the General Fund repaid over seven years. She stated in 2023, it was

the last year that the last payment was made which was $642,000. She

stated that the concept is the same, but it is in reverse. She stated so now

the General Fund is lending the Solid Waste Fund.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that you are robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Ms. Bina Patel stated not necessary stating that this is to keep our financial

stability going. She stated that revenue generation and the revenue for the

General Fund will sustain with the 3.96 percent. She stated 1.5 million is

what it is going to generate. It is the small increase. A small increase in

property tax and that is a recurring revenue that this increase will generate.

Mr. Ed Zucal asked let's say the 3.96 doesn't pass, is the mayor still willing

to keep that $115.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that this is a new proposal that works with that

increase of 3.96 percent and $715.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated if he doesn't get one, then he is not going to give the

other.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that we have to be financially responsible. She

stated that the recommended proposal is being if the city is being

financially responsible.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated you just said that you are going to take it out of the

unappropriated balance.

Ms. Bina Patel stated not take it out. It is a loan, that the Solid Waste Fund

will repay over five years.

Mr. Ed Zucal asked let me ask you this question, what revenue are you

going to use to repay.

Mr. Ed Zucal asked let me ask you this question, what revenue are you

going to use to repay it.

Ms. Bina Patel stated the Solid Waste Fund. She stated that they have

revenue that is going to repay over years. She stated so $200,000 Solid

Waste Fund can afford to be paid over five years.

Mr. Ed Zucal asked even if you drop it $2,500 for each household now.

Ms. Bina Patel stated correct in 2026.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that is good math. He stated that he doesn't know how

she got to that, but ok. He stated that is all he has.

Mr. Daryl Hendricks asked if there was anybody else.

Mr. Santo Napoli stated that he has a question for Mr. Beckett stating that

he worked for other municipalities and asked if this is something that

traditionally has been done over your career or is it something that you

seen at other places when it comes to funds or loaning money to other

funds within the municipal governments.

Mr. Tom Beckett stated that there are for larger governments like

Allentown. He stated that he can't think of any larger government that

doesn't regularly do interfund transfers for loans like this. He stated that

one of the reasons that you can do this is if you have been fairly savvy and

fairly diligent with managing the funds and the budget of the city over the

last eight years. He stated so you will have resources in terms of General

Fund balance that allows you to essentially make a decision tonight which

is their costs. He stated that the cost is X. How do you pay for the cost and

who pays for those costs. He stated that this technique here gives you the

ability to decide that. To make that decision and he thinks it is a nice thing

that they can do this. He stated that it is not unusual. It is something that he

sees quite frequently. He stated as Bina said sometimes here in

Allentown, it happens all over the place.

Mr. Santo Napoli stated that his last question, they were told a couple of

weeks ago from our Controller that taking money out of the General Fund to

close a budget gap is not ideal. He stated, but this being a loan would

change that. He stated ultimately his concern, is the city's credit rating

because as they know the city has Capital Projects in the pipeline and if

our credit rating changes for the worst, obviously the debt and financing

changes and they incur more debt. He asked how does this protect the city

from that versus taking it out of the fund and closing the budget.

Mr. Tom Beckett stated that he thinks what it does is, the Controller is right.

If you have a structural deficit and you are drawing down your reserves to

pay for that structural deficit over multiple years, that is a bad sign for the

Rating Agencies. It is going to put your rating under pressure. However,

you have a significant amount of liquidities so that a million dollar loan,

interfund loan to the Solid Waste Fund is really not going to move that

needle right now. The bigger issue is sustaining the good financial

management that you guys have put together for the last couple of years

meeting your expenses and revenues. He stated several years ago, that

was not the case for Allentown, but over the last eight or more years that's

been the case every year. He stated that there is a lot of credit to go

around with people on the dais up there as well as people in the

administration. He stated a million dollar loan is not going to move the

needle a lot on your rating.

Mr. Santo Napoli thanked Mr. Beckett.

Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated Mr. Zucal.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated Ms. Gerlach and then he will go.

Ms. Ce Ce Gerlach stated to follow up on that question, a million dollar loan

would not move the needle in terms of our Credit Rating, but a $1.5 million

withdraw, if they were $1.5 million less in General Fund asking would that

move the needle in terms of our Credit Rating.

Mr. Tom Beckett stated that it depends on what it is going to be used for.

He stated if you are using that $1.5 million to draw down and pay for a

structural deficit (i.e. revenues are less than expenses) when you pass the

budget, that is a different story then making a loan to a fund to change the

incident of taxes and fees for your residents. He stated that one is

explainable as pretty good and savvy financial management and decision

making that comes from your consensus. The other one can be viewed as

not being diligent about matching leverage and expense over time. He

stated that he thinks the level is important and he doesn't think that $1.5

million for instance the decision and the need was $1.5 million loan to the

Solid Waste Fund versus a million dollars. It really wouldn't move the

needle as much either, but if it is $1.5 million to avoid to paper over a

recurring budget deficit, that is a different story.

Ms. Ce Ce Gerlach stated go you and just as a reminder, and asked do we

have 50 or 51 mill in the General Fund.

Ms. Bina Patel stated $50 million.

Ms. Ce Ce Gerlach stated $50 so they have $50 million in the General

Fund. She stated that she does want to echo Mr. Zucal and stated that she

does appreciate them doing this and knows she can imagine it might feel

like sometimes it doesn't matter. Because it is like I do all this work and

Council votes against it. She stated that she appreciates it and she does

appreciate the conversation they had the other day and when we talked

about and had asked about her reception was going out and she wasn't

even sure how much of the conversation you got and other ways to

generate revenue since now the administration is very much focused on

and seems like more a progressive taxing system where those who earn

more, pay more. She stated that seems to be the focus now. Really, what

we want to do and stated that they are other ways to achieve that like she

had mentioned about the entertainment tax and she knows that there are

some preemptives stuff they would have to think about. She stated that a

lot of that would between the mayor and the Brooks Brothers and their

contract they explicit say that there cannot be an entertainment tax. She

stated that could be a conversation between the mayor and the Brooks

brothers to renegotiate that and impact fees she stated that it would be

nice to know impact fees by developers because we say in this

conversation that developers will face more than a burden with the mayor's

alternative plan and since now that is a concern of making sure that we are

holder the developers accountable, impact fees will do so and it will

generate revenue and stated that she is wondering why they haven't done

that, if that is now the concern .

Ms. Bina Patel stated thank them and stated that she thinks they had a

poor conversation and your call dropped.

Ms. Ce Ce Gerlach stated that the connection was.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that she did try to explain that and did explore it and

actually they had an RFP last year where they explore other revenues. The

city of Easton has entertainment fees and wanted to explore and see if they

can implement that here for Allentown and release that burden on our

property owners. She stated that they are so limited, right. There are ways

to control that and that is something that the mayor can explore in the future

and have that relationship, but it is a state mandated rule that it is very

difficult to change, but yes, it is something that can be explored, but did they

try that, yes. She asked did they explore, yes, she did. She stated that the

negotiations are already done by the state or our Home Rule Charter limits

us on what we can. She stated that what she was trying to say when they

were having conversations was that only limited things that could be

changed tax wise. She stated one of them is city real estate tax. The

second one is Earned Income Tax. She asked did she mention that they

are one of the higher rates, 1.975 currently. She stated that balance if they

increase the Earned Income Tax might impact the city as well as the

employers are coming into the city and might have to pay higher wages to

their employees to make up the difference because their neighboring

taxing authority average rate for Earned Income Tax is one percent. She

stated so if you increase, they already close to two percent if you increase

that. She stated that was not an option because they do want to bring

businesses into the city, getting better and they are expanding and want to

continue that growth. She stated that was not an option. The Deed

Transfer Tax as she mentioned was something that she wanted to explore

and they did last year to remove that from the Charter. This year, Council

has that and that is on Council's Agenda as well that they were able to

remove the Deed Transfer tax from the Home Rule Charter. She stated

now, it allows them to if they choose, if Council chooses to increase that

rate. She stated only limited choices we will have. She stated that she did

explore that and had some other city folks on that RFP as part of that

committee and they are just so limited. She stated that she does want

them to understand. She stated that this scenario that she is proposing

originally is the mayor's idea. She stated her and the mayor explored

some of that a couple of years ago as well and what is being presented to

you here. She stated that the higher value property is where the impact is.

She stated that the second point she does want to make that they do have

commercial properties that are not part of the garbage collection, not part

of our contract and stated that she thinks that is the other point she was

trying to make on the phone conversation they were having on Teams. She

stated that they do pay property taxes, but they are not part of the $740 or

$715 per unit. She stated that they are exempted from there and allows our

contract allows them to be exempted. She stated so your kind of not taxing

them on the garbage fees, right. She stated that if they do the property tax

increase, they include them in that increase and that helps with the fixed

income or people on an income that is lower and they are not Allentown

median income. She stated that we are addressing that. She stated that

she wants them and they have the right to vote however they want and she

wants to make sure that she is communicating the whole picture to them

and they understand that what you are voting on, right.

Ms. Ce Ce Gerlach stated you know definitely and appreciates that again

and does remember in their conversation also talking about most of the

folks and when they referred to the folks who are on fixed incomes or low

income, many of them are renters. She stated that they talked about how

this cost is going to get passed on to them not only through the increase in

trash fees, no matter if it is $115 or more, property owners double that,

triple that. They take advantage of not all, but many property owners take

advantage of the fact that we increase taxes or the cost of increase. She

stated very rarely does she may encounter a tenant who tells her that their

rent only went up to 20 bucks. She stated that does not happen. She

stated that it goes up $50, $100, $300 and the property owners blame it on

tax increases. She stated that she hears the argument in terms of like the

parcels and whether they are located and then there was the reality of the

people and the dynamics behind those numbers that the majority of the

persons and she was trying to figure out if 615 Whitehall Street was a rental

or owned. She stated that she couldn't figure it out in this amount of time,

but she would venture to say that a good number of them are rentals so they

will pay more.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that she does agree that is an excellent point. If you

are looking at the blue scenario in blue, that doesn't avoid that passing on

an increase, right. You are still seeing an increase of the garbage fee per

unit, increased to $740. She stated that could still be passed on to the

tenant stating she does understand completely what you are saying, but

either scenario does not address that it will not be passed on to a tenant.

In the alternate scenario, being proposed is actually helping and she knows

exactly what they are saying. She stated if a property owner is not renting

the property, but really it is residents residing in the property is actually

helping them.

Ms. Ce Ce Gerlach stated thank you and said she thinks she is good, thank

you.

Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated ok, anybody else on the dais and stated Ms.

Affa.

Ms. Candida Affa stated that she would like to touch on something that Ms.

Gerlach said about and addressed this years ago. She stated the

entertainment tax. She asked how many large venues do we have that are

not taxed, the Entertainment Tax. She stated that the Pigs don't pay

Entertainment Tax, do they or PPL or the Flyers? She asked is Archer

being or are they all being. do they have?

Ms. Bina Patel stated no. She stated that we are limited so we are not

able to stating the city's Home Rule Charter limits the city to using new tax.

She stated that they explored that last year. THey had an RFP out and

explored that and it is limiting us. It's either they change their Home Rule

Charter which.

Ms. Candida Affa asked why doesn't the Home Rule Charter stipulates

small businesses. She stated for 28 to 38 years she had to pay an

Entertainment Tax. She asked does it only eliminate the larger ones.

Ms. Bina Patel stated Amusement Tax is maybe different from an

Entertainment Tax. She asked Ms. Affa if she is talking about Amusement

Devices you have in restaurants and paying tax on those.

Ms. Candida Affa stated no, any entertainment tax. She stated whether

she had a band in her bar, karaoke in her bar, she had to pay an

Entertainment Tax. She stated like say the Archer, they had bands in there

and had to pay an Entertainment Tax.

Ms. Bina Patel state that the city is not assessing Entertainment Tax

currently.

Mr. Michael Hanlon stated that he would offer this and they could relook at

this. He believes in the ANIZDA legislation and stated in the ANIZDA

legislation and in the Coca Cola Park Agreements there was a prohibition

against taxing tickets and stated that is what he believes. He stated that he

believes that Council has looked into that in the past and he believes in the

ANIZDA legislation related to PPL and he believes in the Coca Cola Park

Agreements prohibited taxing the ticket.

Ms. Candida Affa stated that her question also is venue coming up like

Archer. She stated that she understands they had in the contract that they

wouldn't pay and now as they are getting new venues in there, all she is

saying that they are looking for places to get more venue and she knows

that is one that would really help them a whole lot. She stated that if they

had an Entertainment Tax. She stated that she is just wondering about the

new venues that are coming up. She stated that she keeps saying Archer

because it is the newest one and the only one she could think of that will be

coming up. She stated paying an Entertainment Tax. Entertainment Tax is

any entertainment. If it is a stripper, it is still entertainment.

Ms. Bina Patel stated yes, Archer is part of NIZ. The parcel is in NIZ.

Ms. Candida Affa stated that she should have gotten that parcel.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that this is her point to you that you are so limited.

She stated that they have explored all different avenues. She stated that

the proposal in front of you actually is a fair proposal. It is helping

taxpayers. It is addressing the commercial properties that are not part of

the collection. Garbage fees are not contract currently. It is a fair proposal

in front of you. She stated that she understands that Ms. Affa have a right to

vote however you want. She stated that she wants them to process what

she is saying and at one point, they cannot constantly say use the cash to

balance the budget stating that is not a financially sound decision.

Ms. Candida Affa stated that she understands that Ms. Patel has nothing to

do with this. All she is saying is maybe the administration in the city

somehow, someway should start entertaining doing something like this.

She stated that you are the Finance Director, you do what you are told to

do and you have the numbers. She stated that she brought this up several

years ago and of course, like everything else things are kicked to the curb

and they never bring it up. She really believes getting some revenue in

from these biggest places and taxes and they should consider that. She

stated that she knows that it has nothing to do with this, but she thought that

since Ce Ce brought it up she thought it would be a great time to bring it up

again.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that so she is in agreement with her and that is why

she had explored it, yes.

Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated Mr. Zucal.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that he just got a couple more questions. He stated

that you mentioned about the businesses. He stated that almost every

business that he knows whether it is a garage or restaurant, they have

those big dumpsters and they actually have their own contractors come in

so he doesn't see how that is going to help us here. He stated when you

met with Councilmembers a while back, he believed Ms. Patel stated that

the city had a deficit of 2.6 back then.

Ms. Bina Patel stated this year, 2.6 to balance a budget.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that we had a deficit of 2.6 that we had to balance, right

and asked is that correct.

Ms. Bina Patel stated correct.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated ok, so last meeting Ms. Mota offered up to take the 1.5

out of the unappropriated balance and Council voted to agree to that. He

stated in addition to that they also have to take in order to balance the

budget and that is with the tax increase, another 1.1 to balance it. He

asked is that correct.

Ms. Bina Patel stated correct.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated and then we will also have to take more money for

each of the $25 of each dwelling, residence, or however you want to look at

it. In addition to that $1.1.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that the $25 that the proposal is addressing is

reduction in garbage fees that is a loan to the Solid Waste Fund. She

stated that the Solid Waste Fund is going to repay the General Fund.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated ok, but in his world if he takes a loan out, he has to pay

it back.

Ms. Bina Patel stated right and that is what she is saying. The Solid Waste

Fund will repay the General Fund over five years. She stated so if it is a

million dollars.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated that was his question so to pay that, you are going to

have to make up that $25 somewhere down the road during the contract

term.

Ms. Bina Patel stated correct. Contract services for garbage collection is

the cost of doing business increase. The Council approved that contract

last year.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated yeah.

Ms. Bina Patel stated so you are absolutely correct. She stated that there

will be an increase for garbage to make up the difference for the cost to

address the increase in contract services, yes.

Mr. Ed Zucal stated ok, thank you and stated that's all.

Mr. Santo Napoli stated one more question. He asked about the trash fees

for the next couple of years, what are those numbers. He asked Ms. Patel

to refresh their memories starting 2027.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that she believes it is $40 next year and believes $20

the following year and $30 the third year.

Mr. Santo Napoli stated for those three years, we have much lower than,

this year and the previous years. He stated that over the last fews months

he heard $51 million a lot. He asked help Mr. Beckett or yourself why is

that number relevant. He stated a lot of municipalities carry that kind of

balance when is comes to a fund balance.

Ms. Bina Patel stated that $51 million is part of our current cash balance,

right. She stated that is for paying our operating expenditures. She stated

that they generate revenue and pay expenditures. She stated that is where

the money is for paying our expenditures. She stated that having a healthy

fund balance does various things for us. She stated that she can address

some and Mr. Beckett can comment as well. She stated it definitely as

they talked about it earlier helps our credit rating. She stated just like our

own personal credit ratings when they go out for borrowing. The rating

agencies will see our cash balance and our borrowing rate when they issue

bonds. She stated that is a taxpayers impact. It is for 30 years. The bonds

will be for 30 years. The interest we pay on those bonds will be lower if we

show we are financially responsible. We have a healthy cash balance and

then we pay less on the interest. She stated that is why we need to show

that we are financially healthy if we go out for borrowing. Regardless, we

should not be spending more than we bring in, but this is one of the

reasons why having a healthy cash balance is very helpful for our taxpayers

and for the city.

Mr. Tom Beckett stated that this is a difficult question that he gets a lot. He

stated that we are asking our taxpayers to pay more taxes this year and we

got a significant amount of money in the bank. He asked why is that. He

stated as Bina said, there is in any organization in his mind whether it is

business, a household, if you are fortunate enough or government, there is

a need for what he calls for one of the better words: for liquidity, for

emergencies, and other purposes. He stated $50 million is a lot of

liquidity, but several things have already been designated out of that $50

million. He stated that one of which is a contribution towards the capital

cost of the new police station. He stated that is and asked Bina to correct

him if he is wrong, $6 or $7 million. He stated that some of that is already

earmarked for capital. He stated that the other component of it is that it will

allow you to guard against any sudden increase and unanticipated

increases in expenses or drops in your revenue. He stated so one of your

drops that can happen in revenue and this just happened in Allentown

before is the Earned Income Tax can go down. It is more volatile than your

property tax. If you don't have that fund balance, you don't have a way other

than going out and borrowing short-term cash flow note to make up the

difference. He stated that it is important to have a level of liquidity for

operating purposes. It is important to put money aside for capital

purposes. The other thing that is the least important thing is to make the

Rating Agencies happy. He stated that they are going to slap my hands for

telling you this, but he personally doesn't believe they should be doing

anything only for the Rating Agencies. You should be doing things for the

city of Allentown. One of the things that liquidity is going to allo

Budget Bills - these are here for reference purposes.

15-8105

Background/Attachments

1.A proposal to decrease the solid waste fee by $50 and reinstate the tax

increase at 3.96%. (Affa, Hendricks, Santo)

Background: On November 19th City Council amended the General Fund

Budget to remove the mayor’s proposed 3.96% tax increase. At that time,

the Mayor proposed a compromise that would reduce the solid waste fee

by $25. President Hendricks scheduled a special meeting on December 3

to review the mayor’s compromise. After reviewing the compromise and

reviews by the Finance Director and the City Controller, Councilpersons

Affa, Hendricks and Santo are proposing a reduction in the solid waste fee

by $50 and reinstatement of the mayor’s proposed tax increase. The

General Fund would lend funds to the Solid Waste fund which would be

paid back over time – a common practice this city has used multiple times.

In the recommended alternate proposal the property owners least able to

absorb increases remain protected. In the new proposal fixed-income

taxpayers are NOT disproportionately impacted. The City still generates

the revenue needed to sustain services. The alternate proposal lowers the

garbage fee and results in little to no increase for lower-valued homes and

some even pay less than they are paying currently. Higher-valued

properties contribute slightly more, which reduces the burden on residents

living on fixed or limited income. This makes the alternate proposal a more

equitable option for our community while maintaining essential revenue for

services. The new proposal would have a positive impact on 23,000 single

family residents – out of a total of 26,000. The impact is presented on the

spreadsheet attached to the agenda. This policy would retain cash

reserves and a fund balance that would lower borrowing costs for projects

everyone on this dais has approved. It follows recommendations from our

Finance Team, Controller and Financial Advisor.

2.Proposal submitted by the Mayor found on Budget Memo 2: Increase the

Mayor’s operating budget by $50,000 to support the Conference of

Churches in providing an additional day of weekly services for homeless

support.

000-09-00908-0091-50040 - $50,000

$50,000

Attachments: Amend FV.docx

2026 Finance Budget Memo 2.docx

For 12.10.2025 Meeting - Garbage Fee Data.pdf

Smaller Sample of Properties For 12.10.2025 Meeting.pdf

$50 Proposal Impact Single Family Residence Detailed Tax

Impact.xlsx

Unhoused Coor Svcs 2026 revised.pdf

Finance Budget Memo No. 1.pdf

HC.pdf

Background Verification Analyst Job Description Final 11. 2025.docx

Per Unit Garbage Fee Cost and Revenue.pdf

Property Tax and Garbage Fee Analysis-12.2.2025.xlsx

Recommended Alternate Proposal.pdf

15-8040

Bill 84

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh, and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, establishing the General Fund,

Administrative Order Fund, Risk Management Fund, Debt Service Fund,

Equipment Fund, and Golf Fund Budgets for 2026.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No. 84 -2026 BUDGET AND TAX RATE.docx

15-8041

Bill 85

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh, and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, establishing and adopting the Building

Code Fund Budget for 2026 for Community and Economic Development

per Chapter 270 of City code for Building Fees.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No 85 .- 2026 BUILDING CODE FUND.doc

15-8042

Bill 86

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh, and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, adopting the Liquid Fuels Fund Budget

for 2026.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No.86 - 2026 LIQUID FUELS.doc

15-8043

Bill 87

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh, and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, establishing and adopting the Rental Unit

Licensing Fund Budget for 2026 and amending Article 1759 – Landlord

and Rental Fee by maintaining the Residential Rental Fees.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No.87 -2026 RENTAL UNIT FUND.doc

15-8044

Bill 88

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, establishing and adopting the Solid

Waste Enterprise Fund Budget for 2026 and amending Article 1131,

Municipal Waste Storage, Collection and Disposal by increasing the Solid

Waste Fee at Seven Hundred Forty ($740) Dollars.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No. 88- 2026- SOLID WASTE FUND AND FEE.doc

15-8045

Bill 89

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, establishing and adopting the Stormwater

Fund Budget for 2026 and amending Article 393.15 – Stormwater Utility

Fee by maintaining the Stormwater Utility Fee at Twenty ($20) Dollars per

Five Hundred (500) square feet of impervious surface.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No.89- 2026 STORMWATER FUND AND FEE.doc

15-8046

Bill 90

An Ordinance of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh and

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, adopting the Trexler Fund Budget for

2026.

Administration

Sponsors:

Attachments: Bill No.90 - 2026 TREXLER FUND.doc

ADJOURNED: 6:23 PM