City fiscal watchdog John Marshall Lee put up a heckuva battle waging a petitioning campaign for City Council in the 130th District covering Black Rock and a portion of the West End. He came up short, but he’s not going anywhere. He’ll have a new administration to monitor starting December. This address Monday night was his final to the outgoing City Council.
President McCarthy, members of the Council and Bridgeport voters and taxpayers: This is the last time I will address this sitting group. Tomorrow brings Election Day. Much attention has been on the Mayoral race, but the face of this body, representing all the people, will change as well.
Five years ago I had fiscal concerns and began raising them. I focused on Pension Plan A that provides monthly income to public safety retirees at $30 Million annually with withdrawals from a fund created in 2000 when $350 Million was borrowed to be invested by the City. By 2030 more than $800 million will have been paid. However there is less than $100 Million of investment in the fund today. Police and Fire budgets are spending more than $30 Million annually as repayment of Pension Bonds for fifteen more years. When the investments run out taxpayers will have the retirement income payments to fund in addition to the Pension Bond payments. Have you been a Watchdog in that process?My attention moved to the Budget and Appropriations Committee where the Charter called for monthly reports of revenues, expenses and variances but you were receiving only 11 months of reports. Finally in 2012 the City lived up to its responsibility of showing 12 months but marked the report DRAFT. No final report until 2013 when for the first time in over two decades someone might have a 12 month view. However, in terms of monitoring, the 85 page report was cumbersome and provided more info than you require. We have advocated for an executive level report that might be useful when you looked for variances or wished to compare what trends occur over several years. Last month a 25 page finance report hit your desks. The narrative, column and headings and vacant variances need more work. Where are your Watchdog requests to improve this report to provide diligent and intelligent oversight monthly? Five members of that Committee depart. Is anyone concerned? Why is this Operating Budget report not available on the City web site by the fourth Friday of a following month for taxpayers to view?
I looked at Ordinances on Purchasing and found NO Annual Purchasing report, nor was there a triennial audit as you directed. Was it only because an internal auditor was terminated 7 years ago and no one had taken up the responsibility? Perhaps a new Ordinance Committee might see if there are other Ordinances that need work from attentive Watchdogs? Another Ordinance item refers to the City Council stipends. I believe that you have moved to a debit card system in recent years that is not authorized by the existing and unchanged Ordinance that calls for “reimbursements” of Council related expenses. Is this housework that needs attention? Can the public look at the Stipend reports? If not, why not? Trust is built slowly through Open, Accountable and Transparent governance. Are you providing that to the public today?
During the last two years I have studied the Net Taxable Grand List, revaluation process, and City control of property it owns. Would it surprise you to know that last week the City attempted to sell property it did not own; or that another property, previously owned by the City, then sold to a tax lien auction was returned by a quit claim procedure back to the City, but the City did not know about it until they were shown the deed many moths later. Who is minding the store? Are our most basic records accurate and trustworthy? Are the most vital audits reported on the City website or kept from public view?
Finally what of the activity of very important committees like the City Hall Committee (that handles City property), the School Building Committee (that has $700 Million of Capital funding in the Finch terms), the Pension Plan A Committee and others … where are these missions promoted, their meeting agendas posted and minutes made available by modern technology?? Where are the elected City watchdogs who will see that “secret governance” becomes more public? Time will tell.
Never give up. Want to stop police overtime, which cripples the budget? Cap the retirement. Set it reasonable and fair, but put a cap on the amount of pension at retirement.
Jennifer, that’s a great way to say thanks for risking your life every time they go to work, being away from their families especially their children, the injuries. Thanks for protecting us but we can’t pay you the pension you signed up for when you made the decision to serve Bridgeport, thanks.
That’s not necessarily true, Mr. Mackey. Currently, road jobs are factored into the pension payout. I’m okay with shift OT being factored in, but not road jobs.
Ron, going forward with caps. Seems to me if an officer was guaranteed, say $100k retirement, with col every year, then the overtime would be a choice to increase income when needed, and the ability to stay home with family if the extra income is not needed. Every job has known risks and rewards. The real pension obligations would be a known number to the police, the taxpayers and the government budget process.
Jennifer, overtime in the police and fire department is from poor management and staffing. Allow police and firefighters to be able to withhold their labor and service like other union members are allowed to do, in other words let them have the right to go on strike. After all, they don’t seem to be that important.
With that being said, you can’t blame an officer for taking advantage of an agreement that was vetted and agreed to by management and the union.
I completely agree. There is so much finger-pointing at police overtime during the budget process, and unfairly under the current rules. And the very real concern about the management of the pension fund, it would be criminal to not pay out promised pensions. And retired Union employees have very little Union protection regarding really protecting their hard-earned benefits.
Ron, I think what you guys are talking about is the new police and fire pensions. Under the new pensions police and firefighters are allowed to retire on the highest three income years. This includes department OT and outside overtime. I see no reason I have to pay the pension cost for watching a hole or a sold-out performance at the arena. We are going to have officers retiring with pensions exceeding their annual salary. This means a cop or firefighter after 25 years under the old contract would retire at $30,000 or a little more, now with the new pension plan the sky is the limit. Stratford had this system but had officers retiring at 200% of their salaries. Ron, forget the strike stuff.
I enjoy listening to real issues being discussed with union, management, retiree, legal, and contractual viewpoints getting their due as well. Everyone can learn something and perhaps something memorable when you take the context of a discussion into consideration.
Let me pose a question for your response: Where and when is the actual taxpayer provided an opportunity for expressing a viewpoint on contract or other fiscal issues with timely info? An example from two years ago: how do actual Bridgeport taxpayers feel about City Council members, 15 of them at the time, agreeing to spend taxpayer money close to $30,000 to a variety of local charities without an agenda, a recorded meeting with minutes, or any notice to the public? What is happening at this minute by departing members of the Finch administration in terms of using taxpayer money for actions that have not been approved by City Council? Where are the watchdogs who provide monitoring and outlook, short- and long-term, over taxpayer funds? Should such people be requested to repay funds to the City? Time will tell.
JML, let me take shot at one part of your question, as for pay raises and pensions, voters don’t want to pay one cents more in taxes so they would reject any and all raises.
Thanks, Ron. What if they had a choice between a different allocation of current tax revenues? What if they were truly brought into the information to see how much something costs today and will cost tomorrow, rather than have everything hidden, so a puppet master like Tom Sherwood can come to the City Council each year with his “story” and explain how almost all of the budget is FIXED and there is little room for movement? And the Council has bought it because their info flow is clogged and unclear. And no one has a sense of City priorities. So we end up blaming people in the system and do nothing about the structure and processes in place that make their lives miserable.
Won’t it take a year or two to see whether the people of the City, including taxpayers, feel the effect of being freed from the governance practiced by the Finch administration? Will it please them? Will they become better consumers of governance activities?
In the meantime, people express hope and wish to trust, but require well thought-out priorities, plans, and actions that will verify the second chance for Joe Ganim as Mayor. Time will tell.