City financial watchdog John Marshall Lee shares his latest commentary covering three items: budget review, revaluation and Sikorsky land deal.
Item 1: The Budget & Appropriations Committee met on Monday July 8 for a discussion of items they had noted for action during the April budget review process. Their discussion was observed by Brian Lockhart who wrote an article for the CT Post on the subject, a possible City Council 2013 candidate and me. They talked about research into “best practices,” more info provided more timely from the City before they must make decisions, but they did not address the latest monthly financial report, provided to them on the evening of July 1 at a City Council meeting, covering ten months through April, 2013.
The report did provide an opening summary for the first time this year that projected a $187,908.72 surplus for June 30, 2013. Actual tax revenues received are close to $4 Million in excess of projections with two months to go, plus the Machinery and Equipment windfall exceeding projection by $2,840,000 would ordinarily be very favorable and get a narrative comment explaining them. Not this year! Nor any questions publicly expressed by B&A about the reported items. On the expense side, the reduction of #51000 Full Time earned pay by nearly $4 Million last September has not received comment by B&A. (This covered the elimination of numerous “ghost positions” that had been vacant for more than 12 months yet had been included in annual budget votes by the Council for two years or more.)
Those three items could have provided a positive spin to oversight of City management by the B&A. But the conversations, questioning and requests for explanation did not occur despite B&A Co-Chair Sue Brannelly’s motion two years ago to review the Monthly Financial report of revenues, appropriations and variances as a standing agenda item. Will a part-time City employee or consultant cure the resistance of uninformed, unmotivated or cowardly Council persons to ask the important questions and move their check and balance duty towards ‘best practice land?’ Time will tell.
Item 2: OIB has noted the upcoming revaluation potential activity in the City. Some have questioned where the funds will come from to pay for this. Two years ago during budget sessions I remember a statement that funds had been provided to assist with this service. So I went to the Approved budget for 2013 (just closed) and the Approved budget for 2014. Unofficial reference to Line Items 56095 regarding Appraisal services ($43,000) and 56180 indicating Other expenses ($106,949) show funds that can be tapped. Turning to the June, 2012 ‘draft’ 12 month report and this years April, 2013 recent report, we can see that 95-100% of Other expenses are available for both years and through 10 months this year only 50% of the Appraisal budget is spent. Money has been prudently budgeted and it is available for appropriation per the above reports. How will it be spent? And perhaps more importantly, when will it be spent and the results reported to the public? A report indicating a reduced value of one’s home is not good news for City Council members facing re-election, is it? The national economy is a major driver of asset values, but how will voters look at the respective responsibility of this administration to finance and economics in all of their activities when they go out to vote? What changes will they respond to? Time will tell.
Item 3: Sikorskyland news? How much information was made available in print to B&A or to entire CC regarding the $3 Million allocation for the Airport? Can anyone put their hands on a ‘one page’ commentary that showed: a detailed breakout of estimated expenses for each section of the project; a timeline for action; a responsible party and department for the entire project or parts thereof; an overall statement for the project as to need for, costs and benefits; another statement regarding any known or potential risks to the project and how these would be faced and dealt with; and a list of which departments or people had reviewed and provided approval. No one can do that because that type of ‘one pager’ is not routinely provided by OPM, Finance, or other Departments to CC committees! And therefore everyone comes up empty handed when the fan blades get loaded with it. At best, the questions of some get a lick and promise to “get if for you.” But results are disappointing for those alert enough to ask the questions. What would happen if the CC had a template that they provided to the City for completion before coming to the Council for approval? How comfortable would those City employees on the Council, especially the President of the Council, saying NO DETAILED REPORT equals NO COUNCIL VOTE. And what about NO USE OF CONSENT CALENDAR without that report being on the City website for taxpayer review and discussion with representative in advance of Council vote on an issue?? Time will tell.
Regardless of how relevant the subject is, in order to captivate an audience, brevity is key.
I understand what you mean in your comment about the need for brevity, but for far too long the people of Bridgeport just look at the quick summary. Where has it gotten us? The city council for years has taken the approach to just reading the cover page and asking their leader how should they vote.
I appreciate JML taking the time to summarize this for those who take an interest. When the electorate knows more about what is really going on then they can make a better-informed decision and can ask their representatives more pointed questions, ones that are harder to pass off with the standard party answer.
CT Post on-line comment under Tom White’s OpEd piece says the board to review contracts before they go to council for a vote is no longer sitting–when and why did this happen? That board would have reviewed all contracts–that might help reign in the city budget.
Godiva2011,
Perhaps I have irritated you. I stayed on my topic. For the sake of clarity, I am out to inform as Captain Hawley understands.
I am not out to captivate. I am not running for office and not looking for a City job. I did apply for a position on the Charter Review group and received no reply. That was not unique last time around.
I would also stand for a Finance Board here in the City where questions are asked, and good answers are expected. I am a registered Democrat but the party has no interest in reaching out to questioners so … people think I am a Republican. Only in Bridgeport is a site for lots of info exchange in addition to multiple opinions.
Brevity is for clothing not informing an audience that is as widespread and unknown as this one.
Godiva, in previous years we disagreed on substance if I remember. Are you now a writing or speech coach? I find the most important quality in writing is providing facts that can be substantiated so a trusting relationship between writer and reader can be established and then maintained. In that regard, I feel fairly appreciated, and I keep reading the comments of others looking to be treated in the same way. What subjects can you offer good info on? Time will tell.
I am neither a speech nor writing coach, but I do far more public speaking than your average person, in addition to have done lecturing some years back. I am not dismissing what you write as being of no interest, it just takes forever for you to get to the point. From experience I can tell you when you are speaking to an audience and you get “lengthy” the audience’s attention span narrows. You can see it by their facial expressions and body language.
If brevity is for clothing, then is it safe to say people wear too much clothing? Mr. Lee, please, you are making yourself out to be the second coming of Don Quixote.
Godiva–while I am a fan of what you write–great insights, etc., the title of this piece is DEVIL in the Details, and we all know JML can be devilishly good with each and every detail. That’s how puzzles are put together, one small piece out of hundreds at a time.
*** HOW ABOUT QUICK AND SIMPLE, DIRECTLY TO THE POINT? ***
He is incapable of that, Mojo. He likes to hear himself talk. And JML, good business communications is succinct and to the point. Any professor in an MBA program will tell you that. Maybe JML fancies himself the Nancy Drew of forensic accounting. Time will tell since when JML talks time drags on and on and on.
I concur; and yes, professors do stress that.
If I were to tell Godiva and BRG (who is now reading Nancy Drew mysteries and taking graduate level business courses?) the sky is falling in Bridgeport FINANCIALLY that is, would they care? Or would they just wish me to say: “Duck!”
The past two weeks on OIB has shown a large outpouring of emotional commentary on leadership of the public schools, not all of it terribly brief either, relying on “facts” gleaned from various internet sources. I have tried to cover fiscal issues in Bridgeport for several years without much assistance at all from City administration. I am told they wish I would go away. I have not.
I still think what this City needs, in addition to a great deal of attitude and cynicism, is real fact-based info that may allow the people to re-connect the City story into one where people rescued their governance into the hands or responsible, capable and unconflicted adults who will spend their time, energy and integrity on raising this City from its disability.
Did anybody reading the three items above feel they learned something worthwhile in this regard? If so, like Captain Hawley, please comment. If there is more to an issue you think we are missing, let me know that too.
And if you think my comments are not worthy of comment, keep on trucking … by the way there is a story that has reached a new stage of development relative to Bridgeport that will have a negative effect on the City, unreported by CT Post so far and damaging to the City by millions immediately and likely into the future. Anyone interested? Maybe you’d like to tell me why this is important to you? I’m your neighbor, using my time, talent and resources along with a couple of other people to keep you informed. Why is that important to anyone? Time will tell.
Actually JML, I don’t read Nancy Drew but I do have an MBA and conciseness was stressed.
John Marshall Lee. Do not let others diminish your efforts. You could read and take it as constructive critiques or mean-spirited comments. The truth is we all have a choice. We can read and disregard, we can read and remain silent or we can read and whether we agree or not we must appreciate the effort you put forward. You may in fact be diminishing your own message with your verbosity. Or YOU could be a tad more laconic, your message may just resonate. I appreciate your tenacity. Those commenting on this blog had a choice to read your post or bypass. We read it because in the end we value your input and we know there is sincerity behind it.
Tonight is another City Council meeting. Five-minute time limit, scrupulously managed by Tom McCarthy. For months my comments have been prepared to meet that time limit so that intro, body, and summary comments are heard. A hard copy is delivered to the City Clerk and an electronic copy is usually communicated to all City Council members and the City Clerk, a practice I would recommend to anyone who wants their words to be part of the record and available for future reference.
I expect to present some “news” that has not been carried by the CT Post yet and may even have my snow shovel with me. Time will tell.
No snow. No CC show until August 5, 2013. No shovel. But I have a financial story to write. There is another large hole in our city budget! Time will tell.