TAMRMS#: B06
5.4
REQUEST FOR DECISION
title
Multi-Year Budgeting
Presented by: Atul Saini, Financial Controller, Financial & Strategic Services
label
RECOMMENDED MOTION(S)
recommendation
1. That the Standing Committee of the Whole recommend to Council that the City proceed with implementing a 4-year Capital Multi-Year Budgeting framework, beginning with the 2027–2030 budget cycle.
2. That the Standing Committee of the Whole recommend to Council that the City proceed with implementing a 2-year Operating Multi-Year Budgeting framework, beginning with the 2029–2030 budget cycle.
body
SUMMARY
Through research, engagement, and process review Administration is recommending a phased approach for the implementation of Multi-Year Budgeting (MYB):
• Implement a 4-year Capital MYB beginning with the 2027–2030 budget cycle.
• Implement a 2-year Operating MYB beginning with the 2029–2030 budget cycle.
ALIGNMENT TO COUNCIL DIRECTION OR MANDATORY STATUTORY PROVISION
N/A
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Preparation of the City’s budget is one of the most critical initiatives undertaken by Administration and one of the most impactful decisions of Council as it acts as the fiscal plan that provides the resources required to make progress towards achieving the Community Vision and Council priorities. While a three year operating and 10 year capital plan is prepared annually only one year is approved. This process is resource intensive and often results in repetitive requests and revisions each year.
As a result of the need for long-term planning, Financial Sustainability was identified as one of the Strategic Priorities in the 2022-2025 Council Strategic Plan, with Mult-year Budgeting being one of the initiatives planned to address it. By transitioning to a multi-year approach, the City aims to improve efficiency, provide greater certainty for departments, residents, and Council, and better align corporate financial planning with council’s long term strategic and operational priorities.
Understanding the complexities in implementing a multi-year budget, Administration engaged both internal and external stakeholders to learn from their experiences.
This engagement surfaced several key insights:
• Foundation for success – Clear processes, transparency, and strong change management are essential.
• Flexibility – MYB must include mechanisms for unforeseen adjustments and emerging priorities.
• Broad support – Stakeholders see value in MYB, with capital budgeting viewed as easier to implement than operating.
• Opportunities – Strengthening forecasting tools, assumptions, and information sharing will improve outcomes.
From these insights, the “What We Heard” Report was developed and is attached for your review.
Based on this work, three implementation options were developed.
|
Option |
Approach |
Best For |
|
A: Full 4-Year MYB (Operating & Capital) |
Implement full 4-year budgets (2027–2030) with annual adjustments. |
Transformational change – Maximizes long-term efficiency but requires significant upfront effort. |
|
B: Phased Expansion |
Begin with 2-year budgets, gradually scaling up. |
Balanced improvement – reduces initial risk while building toward full benefits. |
|
C: Capital-Only MYB (4 Years) + Annual Operating |
Adopt multi-year capital budgeting first; operating remains annual. |
Minimal disruption – Quick wins on capital, but misses operating synergies. |
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION & RATIONALE
In considering all options Administration recommends a phased implementation (blending Option B & C from above) tailored to the City’s readiness:
Capital Budget (4-Year MYB)
• Initial Cycle: 2027-2030
• Subsequent Cycles:
• 2031-2034
• 2035-2038
Operating Budget (2-Year MYB Phased Transition)
• Initial Cycle: 2029-2030
• Phased Transition: Three 2-year Cycles:
• 2029-2030
• 2031-2032
• 2033-2034
• Full Alignment: Transition to a 4-year cycle beginning in 2035-2038, aligning with the capital MYB.
Rationale:
1. Capital process readiness – Much of the capital budget process already operates on a multi-year horizon (10-year capital plan, charter submissions, and prioritization). A 4-year MYB capital cycle builds on this framework, requiring only refinement of capital assumptions and forecasting.
2. Operating complexity – Operating budgets are more dynamic, influenced by service levels, staffing, and inflationary pressures. Transitioning to MYB for operating requires stronger forecasting tools, better data, and more extensive departmental readiness.
3. Timeline for preparation – Attempting a 2-year operating MYB as early as 2027–2029 would place high demands on resources and increase the risk of failure in the first round of implementation. Deferring operating MYB to 2029 provides time to strengthen processes, tools, and training.
4. Learning from capital implementation – Implementing a capital MYB first creates a “foundational step” for change management, communication, and process improvements that can be applied to an operating MYB.
5. Risk management – A phased approach reduces the risk of overwhelming staff or eroding confidence in the process, while still delivering meaningful progress toward Council’s long-term strategic priorities.
Next Steps:
If Council approves the recommended approach, Administration will develop the process to approve a 4-year capital MYB (2027–2030) and an annual 2027 operating budget for Council’s consideration in fall 2026.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS OR ENGAGEMENT
To design a multi-year budgeting process that meets the needs of the city, engagement was conducted with two groups:
• External municipalities with experience implementing multi-year budgets (Leduc, Edmonton, Strathcona, and Red Deer).
• Internal departments within the City of St. Albert.
The objectives of this engagement were to:
• Understand how other municipalities have designed and implemented multi-year budgeting processes, including challenges and lessons learned.
• Assess the current state of internal budgeting processes, strengths, and pain points.
• Gather recommendations and perspectives on potential approaches to multi-year budgeting.
• Identify opportunities and barriers to successful implementation.
Key Takeaways
• Strong communication and change management are essential to maintaining long-term support.
• Capital MYB is seen as achievable in the near term; operating MYB will require additional preparation.
• Enhancing tools, data, and assumptions will be critical for reliable multi-year projections.
Future Engagement
Ongoing engagement will be conducted as implementation progresses to ensure departments, Council, and the community remain informed and supported throughout the transition.
IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION(S)
Financial:
None at this time.
Administration will prepare 4 year capital budget for the period 2027-2030 and bring it forward for council’s consideration in fall 2026.
Compliance & Legal:
The City will continue to comply with the Municipal Governing Act (MGA) and all relevant Council Policies. Any policy amendments required to align with a Capital MYB will be brought forward in early 2026
Program or Service:
None at this time.
Organizational:
No impacts on City’s current resources, structure, workloads anticipated at this time. While some staff may experience additional workload during the transition period these impacts are currently manageable.
Risks
Stakeholders – Departments, Council, and residents may find the concepts and processes of multi-year budgeting complex at first, creating potential resistance or misunderstanding; this will be managed through ongoing communication, engagements, education, and transparent reporting.
Implementation Risk - there is a broader risk that moving too quickly could result in errors or undermine confidence in the process; implementing capital MYB first and applying lessons learned before introducing operating MYB will help minimize this risk.
ALIGNMENT TO PRIORITIES IN COUNCIL’S STRATEGIC PLAN
Initiative aligned with Strategic Plan:
Modernize City's Budget - Multi-year Budgeting
Under Council’s Strategic Priority for Financial Sustainability, the following strategic goals have been identified and outlined for action within the Corporate Business Plan:
Council Strategy: Continue to ensure efficiency in City service delivery with focus on long-term financial sustainability. This strategy includes implementation of opportunities identified in the Operational and Fiscal Review as well as advancing the Internal Audit practice and processes and the implementation of audit recommendations•
Corporate Business Plan initiative: Mature and Formalize City's Multi-Year Budgeting
ALIGNMENT TO LEVELS OF SERVICE DELIVERY
MYB process will be aligned with the City’s approved services and service levels inventory.
IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
If Standing Committee of the Whole does not wish to support the recommendation, the following alternatives could be considered:
ALTERNATIVE 1: Direct Administration to pursue one of the other implementation alternatives or a combination of alternatives including amendment to implementation timelines.
Financial:
None at this time
Administration will prepare capital and operating budgets based on Council’s direction for consideration in fall 2026.
Compliance & Legal:
None at this time
Program or Service:
None at this time
Organizational:
Depending on the direction provided by Council there could be significant impacts on City’s current resources, structure and workloads.
Risks
Stakeholders – Departments, Council, and residents may find the concepts and processes of multi-year budgeting complex at first, creating potential resistance or misunderstanding; this will be managed through ongoing communication, engagements, education, and transparent reporting.
Implementation Risk - there is a broader risk that moving too quickly could result in errors or undermine confidence in the process; implementing capital MYB first and applying lessons learned before introducing operating MYB will help minimize this risk.
ALTERNATIVE 2: Defer MYB recommendation and direct administration to bring it forward to the new Council in Q1 2026.
Financial:
None at this time
Compliance & Legal:
None at this time
Program or Service:
None at this time
Organizational:
None at this time
Risks
Opportunity/momentum loss - Council not approving MYB AR at this time could defer the implementation of the MYB to a later date.
ALTERNATIVE 3: Do not proceed with MYB.
Financial:
None at this time
Compliance & Legal:
None at this time
Program or Service:
None at this time
Organizational:
None at this time
Risks
Opportunity loss - Council not approving MYB will have negative impact on long term financial planning and reduce the City’s ability to align strategic and operational priorities.
body
Report Date: September 9, 2025
Author(s): Atul Saini
Department: Financial and Strategic Services
Department Director: Anne Victoor
Managing Director: Diane McMordie
Chief Administrative Officer: Bill Fletcher