| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Court4Fred
Advanced Member
1201 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 09:30:54 AM
|
| The budget is in the hands of the Common Council. They have options; they can accept the budget as is (holding their collective noses) and vote affirmatively, they can cut this budget and send it back to be voted upon by the BOA, or send it back to committee. The point that I am trying to make was that the budget battle isn't over; the vote that took place last week was merely to refer it to it's respective bodies. |
 |
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 09:46:34 AM
|
Well, I said I was no expert....
What I got from the lead story in the Leader-Herald today was that the DOR ruled that it was O.K. for the city council to request a 3% decrease to the bottom line of the city budget but there was no obligation for the mayor to cut the individual line items that make up the budget? How is that possible? It's simple math!
There is very little language in MGL Chapter 44, Section 32 about the city council's power to cut the budget; the single sentence from my prior post was all that I could find. As I said in that post, I believe you would have to legally interpret the budget's bottom line as "any amount recommended in the budget" so that it could be cut. I suppose you could make a legal argument against that as well. I suppose that since there is no specific language in that section about having to cut the lines items if the bottom line were cut, a legal argument could be made that this is not required even though it makes no logical sense.
Also, what was the additional information that was provided to the DOR that caused this to come to light?
When I started this post, I was confused. As I was in the process of composing it, some of the confusion has lifted and I'm getting a feeling that something may stink here. I'm hoping that I'm wrong but we'll just have to wait and see.
Just a reminder to all, the Common Council meeting is at 6:00 PM tonight. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 09:49:03 AM
|
| Didn't DiPerri cite something from the MGL's, if they didn't vote to accept it it would revert to the original bottom line? Anyway, that's how I think I understood it. So, I guess they figured 3% was better than nothing. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 10:04:49 AM
|
| The fact that they didn't sit down and do the hard work of a line by line review is just maddening. Recommending a bottom line cut and expecting this administration to fulfill that recommendation was just foolhardy. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 12:35:59 PM
|
| Citizen, I agree. They should have done a line by line cut. The motion to do the 3% bottom line cut was Van Campen's, it makes me wonder if it wasn't something that the Alderman from ward 5 and the administration didn't orchestrate previous to the meeting. They are playing a big political game with the taxpayers money. I am disgusted with the bunch of them. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 7:20:51 PM
|
| Just when you think this couldn't be more embarassing.... |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 7:28:06 PM
|
| Are you watching the meeting, tetris? When is the mayor going to attend anger management classes????? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 7:33:10 PM
|
| He'll have plenty of time come January. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 7:50:30 PM
|
These are the sections of MGL Chapter 44 Section 32 that the mayor and the solictor are using as the basis of their arguement:
If, upon the expiration of one hundred and seventy days after the annual organization of the city government, the mayor shall not have submitted to the city council the annual budget for said year, the city council shall, upon its own initiative, prepare such annual budget by June thirtieth of such year, and such budget preparation shall be, where applicable, subject to the provisions governing the annual budget of the mayor.
Notwithstanding any provisions of this section to the contrary, the mayor may submit to the city council a continuing appropriation budget for said city on a month by month basis for a period not to exceed three months if said city has not approved an operating budget for the fiscal year because of circumstances beyond its control.
|
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 7:59:51 PM
|
You know what's maddening about this whole thing? City government has handed this administration this opportunity tomake them look like fools for their handling of this budget. And now he's up there whining about how hurt he is that no one has invited him to sit at the cool kids table? The city government asked him to go back and make cuts and he flat out refused to do it. His statement was that he presented a budget and it was up to them to work it. To me, that doesn't sound like someone who would, as the mayor made claim tonight, "be thrilled" to work with city government.
I'm sick of the whole bunch of them. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 8:03:20 PM
|
This is the section that the CC is basing their arguement on:
If the council fails to take action with respect to any amount recommended in the annual budget, either by approving, reducing or rejecting the same, within forty-five days after the receipt of the budget, such amount shall without any action by the council become a part of the appropriations for the year, and be available for the purposes specified. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 8:13:10 PM
|
| Hanlon is hanging his argument on the phrase "circumstances beyond their control." And given a choice between accepting a written opinion from the DOR and a legal interpretation from John Kryzovic . . . guess who I'm going to believe??? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 8:33:37 PM
|
I've cherry picked sections of MGL Chapter 44 Section 32 and posted them tonight. I'm not sure cherry picking does it justice. The last point that mayor made about 15 days is in there, too! If anyone is interested in reading the whole things, here is a link:
You must be logged in to see this link.
It's not really long. Only two screens on my monitor. Don't know why it took the city solicitor two days to read it. It is not really well written and can be confusing and open to interpretation. I would think that the DOR's opinion should be the one that counts though. But what do I know? |
Edited by - tetris on 06/28/2007 8:49:19 PM |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 10:55:47 PM
|
| I just got in. What ended up happening tonight? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2007 : 11:12:15 PM
|
A mess happened...way too much to go into and you have to see it to believe it anyways.
The bottom line is the budget is being cut line by line by the CC; still going on and will be for a long time.
A special meeting of the BOA will be held tomorrow night to approve the cuts. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Budget
