| Author |
 Topic  |
|
EverettsPride
Advanced Member
1140 Posts |
 Posted - 06/09/2007 : 10:14:24 AM
|
A Low Point in Our Budget History
If you watched the budget hearings this morning, you heard the City Auditor Larry DeCoste state that the budget that was submitted by the Hanlon administration leaves us facing the possibility of a Proposition 2 1/2 override. In other words, the City Council cannot legally pass the budget as it was submitted. This is the first time that we've been faced with this situation. It is indeed a low point in our budget history.
The City Auditor was very candid about the situation we now find ourselves in. It is rare that we get this much honesty from this administration, and Mr. DeCoste should be commended for being forthright and brutally honest regarding this budget. He made valid suggestions regarding where it was possible to cut some of the money, including the need to cut jobs from the budget.
This begs the question -- why would this administration submit a budget that they know is illegal? Why would they not have made these difficult cuts prior to submitting the budget? The simple answer is -- they don't want the administration to be the "bad guys." If people are going to be laid off, they want to be able to say "hey, you lost your job, sorry, blame the City Council." It's not only fixed costs causing the enormous increase in this budget, as the Mayor tried to claim in his statement on May 31st -- this administration had the gall to submit salary increases of up to 6%!!!
The City Council has now put the onus back onto the administration, insisting that they take back the budget book and review cuts that could be made in jobs and salaries, as well as looking at school spending (school spending also accounts for a good portion of the budget increase). The City Council also has the responsibility of taking the budget book, reviewing it, and suggesting their own cuts.
The City Council will meet again on Tuesday evening and has requested that the Mayor, the auditor, the budget director, and the school department business manager appear to discuss cuts and answer additional questions that may present themselves after further review for possible cuts.
posted by The Everett Mirror @ 9:37 AM Comment (0) |
|
Edited by - EverettsPride on 06/09/2007 10:14:58 AM |
|
|
Middle-Man 1
Senior Member
188 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 10:43:02 AM
|
| Do you think we can rely on the City Council here? These jokers lambasted the guy about runaway spending last year. They then proceeded to cut a grand total of $5,000 out of a $100 million plus budget. They refused to do their job and stop him last year. Are they suddenly going to morph into protectors of the taxpayers? I hope so but I have serious doubts that they are up to the challenge. If I were a betting man I'd put my money on them attempting the override rather than making the necessary cuts to stop it from happening. |
 |
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:12:47 AM
|
| I disagree, the members of City Government that went after last years budget voted against it, they just were not in the majority. I believe this year there are even more members that have had their eyes opened, and we just might see something done for the tax payers. Notice, I did use the word "might" I don't believe an override would ever pass in this community. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:17:20 AM
|
I can't believe there'd be any hope for an override. I just don't think -- or maybe I should say I HOPE -- that people wouldn't stand for it. I feel very sorry for those who might have to lose their jobs because of this budget, because I and I'm sure others out here have had that happen, but there is no way we can tolerate this; and on top of this, Hanlon has made the claim that he's looking into reinstating the owner occupied tax exemption? I'll be the first to admit that I have very limited understanding of municipal budget practices, but even I understand that you can't increase the budget to the point of a 2 1/2 override threat and then claim that you're looking into reinstating a tax break.
How stupid do these people think we are?
|
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
 Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:17:25 AM
|
| You're right massdee. Last year many more members of city government were trying to work with the new administration and were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. This year, it seems the majority have given up that fight because they realize it's a lost cause and continued alliance with Hanlon will adversely affect their own re-election. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:26:13 AM
|
I don't believe that there is enough time left before the budget is due for the city to attempt an override (I could be wrong though). The budget will have to be cut or money will have to be taken from the stabilization fund to balance it. I think that money could also be taken from next year's Free Cash but since that amount won't be certified until late fall, I'm not sure how that would work.
I have a little more faith in the City Council this year than I did last year. Last year, the council members were just starting to get upset with Hanlon due to his public allegations that they had violated the Open Meeting laws. Since then, a number of things have happened that have distanced more and more of the councillors away from Hanlon. There are very few that seem to consistently align themselves with Mayor any more (Van Campen - thought he was exiting the Mayor's camp at one point but seems to be back lately, Nuzzo - via his allegiance to FFF, can't think of any other obvious ones). Let's hope that most of this gets done via the budget cut route. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:31:08 AM
|
| And who was missing from the meeting today, tetris? Van Campen and Nuzzo (among others). Why weren't they there to defend this abomination of a budget??? Because there IS no defense for it. Even Alan Dershowitz or Johnny Cochran couldn't defend this mess. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:35:32 AM
|
Isn't taking money from next year's free cash like robbing Peter to pay Paul? I can't wrap my head it.
I have no doubt the necessary cuts can be made to get this budget to a workable number. |
|
|
|
Middle-Man 1
Senior Member
188 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:41:59 AM
|
| I certainly did'nt say I believe that an override would pass. I just said I doubt the City Council has the nerve to do what is necessary to stop one from being put on the ballot. When the voters defeat the proposal then they will have to cut the budget and will have cover for themselves claiming taxpayers made the choice. Maybe I'm wrong but I'm not counting on them to do the right thing on their own. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:42:07 AM
|
Citizen,
The home owner exemption really isn't a tax break per se. It is really just a shifting of the tax burden. The same amount of money will have to be raised; it's just who pays it. Therefore, it is possible to have both. How much benefit the people that qualify for the exemption will receive is the question however given how much the tax levy has gone up the last two years. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:51:54 AM
|
That's true, tetris. It is a shift of the tax burden. But I guess what I was thinking is that, to the person getting the exemption, it's a tax break. But wasn't one of the arguments that the mayor made last year was the the city "couldn't afford" the residential tax exemption -- as well as his thinking that it was unfair to those to whom the burden was shifted? As you say -- it's not a break so much as a shift, so . . . if it all balances out in the end, then it's not a question of being able to afford it, right? It's a question of what's perceived to be fair?
Does anyone know what we have remaining in free cash right now? I think the stabilization fund it at about $5 million, but I'm not sure about the "budgetary surplus" account -- which they've been draining quite a bit over the past few months. |
|
|
|
Middle-Man 1
Senior Member
188 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:52:44 AM
|
| If we are at the point that an override is necessary then I don't think any shifting would be possible would it? I don't know for sure but if we have reached the maximum levies can they shift any more onto properties that are not owner occupied? Does anyone know? I am not much of an expert on this. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 11:55:59 AM
|
Citizen,
Nuzzo was actually there, at least at one point. He was sitting up front next to Carlo and Sal. He usually does show up for the budget hearings but almost always has very little to say. I don't remembering hearing from him once today.
Van Campen, that's another story. I remember a few years ago during the Ragucci adminstration, that he was outraged that he was unaware that the city had come close to the tax levy limit. I'm curious to hear what he has to say on this one.
And I whole-heartedly agree, There is NO excuse for this entire mess. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 12:02:59 PM
|
My apologies. I didn't see Alderman Nuzzo. Perhaps if he had spoken up . . .
If Van Campen was "outraged" at coming close to the levy limit, wouldn't you think he'd be apoplectic to find out that they've gone over it with this budget???
Perhaps we'll hear from him at Tuesday's meeting. Does anyone know if he was at Thursday night's meeting for the school department budget? I haven't seen that one yet. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 12:08:57 PM
|
Citizen,
Mr Decoste stated at the meeting today that the stabilization fund was at $6.9 million, about where it should be as far as Wall Street is concerned for our bond rating. He was also stated that another $.5 million was budgeted to be added to it in the 2008 budget. He suggested this as one of the thing that could be cut from the budget as it really wasn't needed. If left untouched, the stabilization fund would grow to over $7 million since the interest on this money goes back into the stabilzation fund, not the general fund.
As far as free cash goes, who knows? It's hard to keep up with. Also, after June 30th, free cash goes away until the DOR certifies the city's operating results for 2007. |
|
|
|
Citizen Kane
Advanced Member
1082 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2007 : 12:26:04 PM
|
Thanks, tetris. I did hear him mention cutting the $.5 million out of the budget, but I didn't hear (or don't recall hearing, which is probably more the case) him mention the total amount.
I believe a couple of weeks ago the Mayor claimed there was about $2 million left in free cash. However, he also lied about the amount that was remaining when Ragucci left office, so . . . who knows what the truth is on that score.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
what a mess, copied from the Everett Mirror
