The City of Madison's mayor and council held a public hearing on the FY27 proposed budget on June 8.
During the hearing, one supporter of the budget — a member of the public who, to my knowledge, is not and has never been a city employee — stated that all staff were included in shaping the proposed budget. As the former Main Street director for the City of Madison from 2023 to 2026, a position that included oversight of a departmental budget, I can say that statement is not accurate.
Not all employees were included. In fact, I specifically asked my supervisor, the human resources director, whether there was a target number or percentage that the Main Street budget should aim to reduce. As a department head, she told me she had not been provided that information.
My supervisor and I met with the finance director in late March 2026, about a week before the deadline for departments to submit their proposed budgets. During that meeting, we asked the same question. The finance director stated that she had received no guidance from the city manager other than the $1.7 million reduction to the General Fund that had been discussed during the second budget retreat. As a result, I was left to work with my department to identify proposed cuts without guidance or support from management.
In December 2025, I was informed that the city manager had told department heads that budget cuts would be necessary. At that time, however, no specific figures were provided. The $1.7 million figure was revealed to me only in a Morgan County Citizen article covering the second budget retreat in February 2026.
My supervisor asked me to think creatively about ways to both reduce expenses and generate additional revenue. Within 24 hours, I provided two pages of ideas. Some related specifically to Main Street, while others were citywide proposals that would also affect the downtown area.
I offered both cost-saving measures and potential new revenue streams. The discussion ended when I was told that only the Main Street and downtown-related items would be shared with the finance director and city manager, who could then pass them along to the council. Three months later, during the March meeting, I learned that this had not yet happened.
At that point, I no longer had confidence that these ideas would reach the council through management channels. As a result, after my employment with the city ended, I presented some of those ideas during the public comment portion of the May 1 council meeting.
During my exit interview, I stated that communication and transparency from management needed improvement. I continue to believe that departments should have been given access to more information throughout the budget process. I also believe every department head should have been given an equal opportunity to present and discuss their budgets directly with the council.
Last year, following a presentation by the Public Works Department, the city manager stated that each department would be given the same opportunity. That never occurred. It also did not occur this year.
The lack of communication, trust, collaboration, checks and balances, and job security under the current management structure is ultimately why I sought employment elsewhere. Had the environment been different, I would still be working in the community where I grew up and one that I care about deeply.
For members of the public who have not worked for the City of Madison under the current administration, I believe it is important to clarify that not all departments have participated inclusively in shaping this proposed budget.
Sarah Wibell,
Valdosta