For local governments, budgeting is never an exact science. There are just too many variables that have to be estimated, which is a strong inducement for governments to be conservative in their revenue projections and take more of a worst-case approach to expenses.

That combination often takes a toll on plans for “wish list” items, things the city would like to pursue but might have to delay in the interest of caution.

The Columbus city council held the first of two budget hearings on Thursday, and the main point of discussion was the desire to create a $15 per hour minimum wage for city employees. The draft proposal of the budget, which must be finalized by Sept. 15, already included 6% pay raises for police and fire personnel and a 3% increase for all other employees, but it didn’t set a floor of $15 per hour. The draft proposal also includes money for three new positions.

Currently, the lowest pay rate for city employees is $12.87. Although City CFO Jim Brigham did not have information on how many city employees are paid less than $15 per hour, he said setting the minimum wage at $15 per hour would significantly impact the proposed  $27.6 million budget for 2025. It’s not merely raising some employees’ pay to $15 per hour, but also increasing pay for long-term employees or those with management responsibilities who are currently making $15 per hour or close to it.

How much wiggle room the city has if it wants to simply add the $15 per hour minimum wage to the proposed budget depends on several factors, some within the city council’s control, others beyond their control.

The combination of massive federal funds pumped into local economies and inflation that has boosted sales tax collections has meant city sales tax revenue has far exceeded projections. That won’t last forever, though. Inflation is slowing and the economy is cooling off. While economists aren’t predicting a recession as they were a year ago, city revenue is likely to fall much closer to projections than in previous years. That means less wiggle room in the budget.

Council members do have another means of generating revenue to cover the increased minimum wage, but could be perceived as breaking faith with taxpayers if they pursue it. The new property appraisal formula will mean an increase in property taxes of 18-to-20% if local governments keep their millage as is. Though he is proposing a property tax rate of 53 mills, down 1.11 mills from FY 2024, increased property values in the city means that lower rate will still generate an additional $600,000. It also means property owners will still see an increase in their taxes.

The council could potentially cover the $15-per-hour minimum wage by not reducing its millage rate or reducing it less than the current 1.11 mill proposal.

With a municipal election coming up next year, taking that approach might not appeal to council members who want to be reelected.

It seems the best approach for the city is to take an either/or approach. Does the city establish a $15 per hour minimum wage? Or does it fund those new positions and across-the-board raises and leave tackling the minimum wage task down the road?

It’s probably wiser to focus on the city’s pay structure first.

We should have a much clearer idea of what the city plans to do Thursday when it holds its second public hearing at city hall.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.