Asserting “that 60% of Bridgeport residential homeowners will actually see an overall tax cut, not an increase as claimed by some,” Mayor Joe Ganim outlines in a commentary his efforts to close a $20 million deficit left by his predecessor Bill Finch while building the first budget of JG2. His commentary follows that was also submitted to the CT Post.
Last year when I ran for Mayor, I noted how the prior administration had continually raised property taxes year after year, except during an election year. I pledged to do whatever I could to reduce the property tax burden on Bridgeport. I have done it before, balancing the city’s budget with no tax increase for 10 years in a row.
But before you can make new tax policy for the city, years of governing experience have taught me that you must present an honest budget. Sadly, the budget my administration inherited halfway through the fiscal year was not honest. Bridgeport is now paying the price for it.THE FINCH HANGOVER
When we took office last December, the Finch administration told us that the city’s budget was balanced. Instead, we found a $20 million dollar deficit–the result of vast overestimation of revenue while not budgeting major expenses, some of which were required by law.
Some examples:
Ø More than $7.5 million in required pension payments for police and firemen were never budgeted.
Ø $2.4 million in salary increases (paid in part to Finch and his top level staff the day they left office) were not budgeted.
Ø City revenues were overstated by $5.6 million dollars.
Ø There was double counting of nearly $900,000 in state aid.
Ø Overtime for police, fire and public facilities employees was under-budgeted by $8,000,000.Presenting an election year budget, the last administration told Bridgeport taxpayers they only needed to collect $292 million in property taxes to fund city services. This shorted their own spending plan by at least $20 million dollars in order to keep the mil rate on properties artificially low.
The actual spending in the Finch budget required $312 million in property taxes to be balanced. If they had proposed an honest budget, their mil rate would have been higher.
THE GANIM BUDGET
Unlike the last administration, the budget I have presented to the Bridgeport City Council is honest. We actually cut city spending by $5 million from $312 million to $307 million.
We have reduced the city’s budget through some of the following measures:
Ø Reducing interest payments by $3.5 million with the refinancing of millions of dollars of city debt.
Ø Instituting a city spending freeze, saving more than $2,000,000.
Ø Reducing the city workforce by approximately 80 employees.
Ø Instituting unpaid furloughs for some employees, and negotiating with city unions concessions to save millions and avoid further layoffs.
Ø Aggressively collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars owed to the city from vendors and other businesses.FINCH’S DELAYED REVALUATION
This year, Bridgeport is implementing property revaluation. This is meant to make the tax burden fairer across the board and more accurate relative to current property values. The revaluation of Bridgeport properties was supposed to take place in 2013, but was delayed for two years by the Finch administration until after the election. Under state law this revaluation could not be delayed again.
This reassessment of city properties is the first since 2008 when the housing market was at its peak, and has resulted in a net loss of more than $1.1 billion from our Grand List. In order to yield the same amount of tax revenue for the city, the mil rate will almost certainly increase. However, this does not mean an increase in taxes for all residents. Instead, depending on new property values, some will see a property tax increase, while many others will see a decrease.
TAX CUTS FOR MOST CITY TAXPAYERS
The city’s finance office estimates that up to 60% of Bridgeport residential homeowners will actually see an overall tax cut, not an increase as claimed by some. The reason for this is in part that property values, and thus the property tax burden, have shifted away from residential properties towards commercial properties.
Additionally, thanks to the hard work of the Bridgeport legislative delegation and state House and Senate leaders, everyone who owns a car in Bridgeport will see a 10 mil reduction in their car taxes. As a state-wide capped 32 mil rate on cars is set to become law in Connecticut, and that will result in an almost 25% reduction in motor vehicle taxes in Bridgeport (from 42 to 32 mils).
Unfortunately, this item is at the center of the budget battle at our state capitol in Hartford. Our municipal budget depends heavily on what level of state aid we receive.
With state lawmakers looking to close a $1 Billion dollar deficit and the governor laying off thousands of state workers, Bridgeport could to lose up to $10 million in state aid.
This would force my administration to re-write the budget, slash critical services, and potentially raise taxes to balance the books. I hope this doesn’t come to pass and I’m working closely with our legislative delegation and House and Senate leadership to prevent this devastating scenario.
Despite our challenges, the budget I propose is honest and looks to reduce the tax burden, while still making a commitment to fund essential services and public safely. This budget will allow us to generate the economic growth that our city needs and unlock Bridgeport’s great potential.
Does this mean we will be getting an amended Ganim bumper sticker and lawn sign? Remember the one that read “Stop raising our taxes?” The words ‘for some’ shall be added to the new Ganim bumper stickers and lawn signs.
I am tired of hearing lies and gross distortions from career politicians. The truth is, the effective tax rate of every property owner goes up when the mil rate goes up! In addition, property values go down. Based on what we know so far, if a property owner’s individual assessment did not go down by around 22%, their actual tax bill will increase. Bridgeport’s grand list went down much more than the average due to failed policies of past Mayors and City Councils, including Ganim. We need dramatic and fundamental change to revitalize the City and avoid bankruptcy and what do we get from Mayor Ganim? Broken campaign promises, excuses, gross distortions, and more of the same approaches. The Mayor and the City Council have done little to address the many recommendations I made over three years ago! Doing more of the same failed policies and expecting a different result is insanity. It is also a prescription for failure.
I feel your pain, David Walker. I made just one simple recommendation by second channels. I asked Det. Garcia (Ganim’s driver), Ed Adams, and Councilmen Paoletto to tell Joe Ganim of an untapped source of revenue which could bring in millions every year. The city council hired a so-called bean counter who I feel will not suggest this source of untapped revenue even if it were dancing naked in front of him. He would have to first talk to McCarthy about the source and McCarthy will ignore it as he has done for eight years while keeping a very close relationship with players within this source.
C’mon, Joel.
You can come in and tell me and if all you say is true, I’m sure this administration will be receptive.
“Untapped revenue.” Really?
Yes carolanne curry, untapped revenue. I attended the Moore fundraiser as I knew Joe Ganim was going to attend. I asked Joe if the any of the above named messengers delivered my message. Not one of them did. I asked Moore to stay and listen to what I was going to tell Joe Ganim–the untapped source. I will be bringing the information to John Gomes in the morning and I provided Moore with a partial CT statute. There may be a need for some legislation to make sure the city can tap into the source.
It’s a damned shame so many elected officials and wannabes like you couldn’t see that source when it’s in clear view to us all. It’s not the first time I had suggested this source be tapped, in fact I blogged it here before.
Joel Gonzalez, would you care to share your budget enhancement ideas?
Joel, save your breath!
Finch’s final budget, emblematic of previous year’s fictions with storyteller Tom Sherwood at the narration, was not honest.
And Ganim’s comments on Finch’s budget are more honest than his review of his own budget for FY 17.
For example:
1) Reducing the City workforce by 100 employees??? Evidence runs there is no net reduction at this moment in Filled positions with 60 terminations of one kind or another since 12-1-15 with about the same number of new hires plus 23 new police officers in training. OAT Solution? Provide the City employee count by department each month as the Monthly Financial report is published with clearly defined categories like: Filled, Unfilled, Vacant and New. (Office of Public Accountability, where are you?)
2) Changing budget format for Personnel Summary from Filled, Unfilled, Vacant and New (four categories) to only two for the FY 2017 budget Filled and Vacant. That is why I have called attention to the dishonesty in the Police Department presentation by saying there are 478 Filled positions and 18 Vacant positions. 478 positions are not FILLED with a City employee receiving a current check for shifts worked. If 478 positions had been FILLED there would have been no need for the EXCESS POLICE OVERTIME in the past five years.
3) Look at the Police Department service indicator metrics for the past several years on page 114 of the budget and you will see a steady decrease in these graphic indicators. Do we need the force to be its currently authorized size in 2017 as it was when the Table of Organization was formed?
4) The Department has goals to select, recruit and train 32 officers in two classes. One class of 23 is in training. Did we fall short? Why?
5) Police overtime anticipates almost $6 Million of revenue to the City from contractors using Police officers to monitor road cut operations. This follows a 40 year Ordinance that has since been included within Police negotiations and contracts. Comments often indicate this revenue stream provides a “profit” to the City, but is that true since the Police moved from Plan B with the 2012 Contract into CT MERS? Isn’t this part of the $7.5 Million annual increase in “required pension payments” never budgeted? What honestly can be done about this going forward? Are there enough conscientious, competent and professional police advisors available to City government to indicate an alternative course, especially if the City is or soon will be back in negotiation on a 2015 or 2016 Police contract? See #6.
6) How many police hours are spent standing around road cuts in a year that are paid as overtime, and that overtime costs City taxpayers millions more because of retirement calculations that exceed former Plan B actuarial assumptions? What if City labor negotiators were to research the potential of renegotiating the external overtime current arrangement with the PD union? What if the City were to propose the selection, recruitment, and training of a Construction Site Safety Force with full time pay, health benefits, a reasonable salary level and a DEFINED CONTRIBUTION retirement plan, a first for Bridgeport CT but common in private industry for over 40 years and also with local governments increasingly in recent years? How many positions would open up for Bridgeport job hunters, including those who may have been incarcerated for non-violent crimes as younger men and women? Thirty or 40? Not gun carriers but outfitted with modern safety and communications gear and trained in their use. More eyes on the street that are rested. Perhaps a lower cost to the contracting firms? And ultimately to us? HONEST Commentary? Still waiting. Time will tell.
JML covered at least one point I was going to make in regards to layoff of 100 but failing to point out the new hiring taking place. Here is the kicker: “The city’s finance office estimates 60% of Bridgeport residential homeowners will actually see a tax cut, not an increase as claimed by some.” The key words “residential homeowners.” About 40% will get an increase of which we are being told the amount of increase is unknown pending setting of mil rate, the same applies to the 60% getting a tax cut. If the 60% get a $100 reduction, will they be dancing in the streets? I don’t think so. Notice there is no mention of COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND BUSINESS OWNERS. They will getting the brunt of the tax increase but will pass the buck to custumers. That $100 cut for the 60% of residents will evaporate. Is this G2 spin or what? What if you are a Bridgeport homeowner on the 40% side and a Bridgeport business owner? You probably heard only one speaker (not counting JML) attended the public hearing on the budget. I bet if I chose to organize a tax protest after the budget is approve and taxpayers know what they are going to pay, hundreds would attend and thousands will call elected city officials.
Joel,
Spinning the facts to create a favorable impression is what has been done in Bridgeport for years. What I have attempted to do for the past five years is to routinely attend a variety of municipal meetings as well as read the material including fiscal reports that cover those departmental subjects. Gradually you become aware of how the wool was pulled over the eyes of the public, of how monitoring or watchdogging was removed from governance behavior, even when the Charter or Ordinances called for it. And Council members today do not get an even chance to learn the right way to function (based on past experience) or the fact some controversy is to be expected between the executive and legislative branches of a democratic government unit. Questions are being asked. New answers beget more questions. Open minds may frame new solutions. If the goal is to practice OPEN, ACCOUNTABLE, TRANSPARENT and HONEST governance, you will hear me cheering. Short of that I will keep pointing in that direction. Time will tell.
In all fairness, the Ganim Administration did partially mentioned the impact of an increase of taxes on commercial properties in a CT Post article not long ago. Instead of attacking Joe Ganim, why not take some time to suggest solutions? Lennie asked David Walker what he would cut from the budget and if public safety would be included. No reply.
Joel,
I did answer, just not by the time of your comment. I travel in my job and don’t look at OIB every day. I provided several pages of ideas three years ago to the Mayor and the City Council. \Mayor Ganim’s team has them too but still little to no action. Bridgeport needs an independent Financial Control Board ASAP.
Not surprised. He’s back to being the old Joe.
I’m 100% convinced this City’s budget will be a failure until it can figure out how to get its police force to function effectively and efficiently.
Connecticut’s largest City needs a leader who cares about the hardworking families who deserve an affordable and sustainable place to live, not a career politician in the pocket of the DTC chair who will say anything to get a vote.
AMEN!!!
Has ANYONE considered Bridgeport is BROKE and essentially BANKRUPT? These are just some numbers off the top of my head. I believe when you add up ALL the money coming into Bridgeport you end up somewhere around 700 million dollars. Property taxes (income for the City of Bridgeport) raised WITHIN the boundaries/borders of Bridgeport is about 300 million dollars. So, our REAL deficit is somewhere around 400 million dollars per year. Can anyone comment on these numbers?
Last time we tried to file for bankruptcy everyone went mad and ousted Mary Moran with JG pt. 1.
When Bridgeport tried to file bankruptcy in 1991,the idea of municipal bankruptcies was VERY rare and it was controversial. Of course, the State of Connecticut fought it tooth and nail and we ended up with the Financial Review Board. However, since then we have seen municipal bankruptcies used more often, used effectively especially in the case of Detroit, Michigan. In 2013 the US Bankruptcy Court allowed Detroit to file Chapter IX Bankruptcy which forced the State of Michigan to get involved, in fact deeply involved and virtually to take over Detroit. Detroit filed bankruptcy in July 2013 and exited November 2014. The general consensus is this strategy was successful.
Frank,
The City should have been placed under an independent Financial Control Board years ago. Bridgeport’s current financial position is unacceptable and unsustainable. CT has serious structural financial problems as well.
Frank G, filing for bankruptcy would hurt a host of retired Bridgeport police and firefighters who were in pension plan A. We put our lives on the line when crime was extraordinarily high and the fire load was at a time when Bridgeport had 40% of every arson fire in the state of Connecticut.
We were told our pension would go into the general fund to help pay the city’s bills and we would be guaranteed a pension for the rest of our lives. There is a distinct possibility a bankruptcy would jeopardize our pensions, which would have a devastating effect on our lives now that most of us are in our golden years. We fulfilled our obligation to Bridgeport and Bridgeport should fulfill its promise to us.
Don, thank you for the facts you are giving and that is the main reason I have rejected David Walker’s suggestions about pension Plan A. I have no problem with the City being placed under an independent Financial Control Board years ago or even now.
Donald Day and Ron Mackey, I certainly understand your concerns about any effects a bankruptcy filing would have on your pensions. Probably there would be a reduction but there would be not be a TOTAL takeaway. The issue of Pensions will not go away. As things go, pensions may become a greater liability in the future than at present. There is a possibility future pensions may be better guaranteed if the fiscal house is put into good order NOW rather than later.
Frank, “We were told our pension would go into the general fund to help pay the city’s bills and we would be guaranteed a pension for the rest of our lives.” Pension Plan A members have been paying 8% of their weekly pay for over 60 years with the legal agreement. We put our lives on the line for our entire career giving up our time with our family and friends and our pension was used to run the City of Bridgeport. Now you think we should be told guys thanks for the loan of the money but we can’t pay you.
As Donald Day said, “We fulfilled our obligation to Bridgeport and Bridgeport should fulfill its promise to us.” Who in hell would want to be a firefighter or a police officer? You want us to protect you and your family but you don’t want to pay us when we retire? One answer is to pay firefighters a much larger weekly pay with enough money for them to buy their own pension.
Ron Mackey, your answer about giving present safety personnel (police, fire) more money up front so they themselves become themselves responsible for their pension may be part of the solution. This is a trend we have seen in the private sector. The problem with the public sector is we have seen companies lower or completely abandon any pension compensation ALONG WITH NO WAGE INCREASES. As Ronald Reagan said, it is “Morning Again In America.”
Frank, think about this, the entire police and fire department members have been paying 8% of their pay every week for 60 years, now imagine that money being placed in regular savings account in a bank and how much interest could have been made but instead their money was used by the City to run Bridgeport and not one penny was made from their weekly 8% of their pay. So are we to blame those who were willing to give their life in serving the residents of Bridgeport and have their pension helping to save Bridgeport? There is something wrong here.
A LOT of QUESTIONS AND A LOT OF COMMENTS but NO ONE has really answered the question of how and whether or not it can be reasonably expected $300 million dollars could be raised through the use of property taxes in the City of Bridgeport. So Mayors Finch and Ganim are being accused of cooking the books to a greater or lesser degree. Tom McCarthy, Council President, is fully to blame for the fiscal crisis. Indeed, I AM CALLING IT A CRISIS!!! The Board of Education budget is flatlined and some here are saying our kids deserve more than what is in the budget. We have an ORDINANCE saying there is a set-away mil rate for the use of the Library alone but Ganim slashes the Library’s budget and Ganim’s Library budget is criticized. There is dubious analysis of Ganim’s Police Budget numbers and there seems to be a consensus we need to hire more police officers and/or pay greater overtime and with all the issues of pensions and health benefits. So what’s the answer? We should give more money to the Board of Education so Bridgeport’s spending would equal what New Haven and Hartford spend per pupil and, of course, Bridgeport is woefully behind. We should follow the Library Ordinance and restore the millions the Ganim budget slashes from the Library. We need to hire the 100 officers that reportedly the Police Department is truly understaffed by. Sooo, LIFE IS WONDERFUL! Where would our mil rate be then??? Maybe Mayors Finch and Ganim are cooking the books because the money is NOT there. What budget would be presented by the OIB gang?
Ganim’s response is really bad news but disguised as “good news.” A billion dollar drop in the Grand List is “only” due to the fact the previous 2008 re-evaluations were sooo high. There may be a teeny bit of truth in that but Bridgeport never really was fully affected by the 2008 housing bubble/crash. The fact is the billion dollar Grand List loss is a DISASTER. Infrastructure in the City of Bridgeport is in a crisis stage. Drive around and look at the housing inventory in Bridgeport. There may be pockets in Black Rock and the North End where housing is well maintained but in the rest of the city, HOUSES ARE FALLING APART. Due to the high property taxes, there is very little or NO incentive to re-invest in remodeling or re-habbing houses. If we just close our eyes and keep on pretending we can limp along as we are, the next wave will be where houses will be abandoned en masse. Ganim claims most of the property tax raises will be absorbed by business properties. That is truly a great answer. So what will happen then? Businesses will abandon Bridgeport and NO business would think about moving here. So we end up and continue the vicious cycle that has brought us to this point. As Bridgeport’s industries abandoned the city, the property tax burden was shifted from all the industries that called Bridgeport home and placed on the backs of residential property owners. THIS BUDGET CONTINUES THE SAME FISCAL DYNAMIC. A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.
“Due to the high property taxes, there is very little or NO incentive to re-invest in remodeling or re-habbing houses.”
Frank, when I’m done with my house, I’m going to invite every OIB reader and poster to the christening. In fact, it would be a good idea to host one of Lennie’s OIB Parties. You won’t be eating any of the food as you will be eating your above words. For quite some time I’ve been hearing from regular OIB readers about how they feel about the many dumbass comments from many of you. Some have even stated they have discussed comments made here with their attorney. Can you guys cool it with the constant bitching?
Joel Gonzalez, congratulations on your highly positive evaluation of Bridgeport real estate and that you are making a re-investment in your property so in the future you will receive a healthy return on your investment. First of all, I want to inform you of my physical condition. I am not blind. In the 55 years I have lived in Bridgeport (about 20 years as a property owner), I have driven through all sections of this city and am quite familiar with all the changes I have seen. If you truly believe our housing inventory is improving, that is your opinion but my opinion is quite the opposite. I’ve also looked at the weekly real estate sales posted. I’ve seen the prices of property sold in Bridgeport. I’ve seen the large amount of properties owned and sold by banks. If you feel comfortable about the billion dollar drop in the Grand List, you are one of the very few. If some of your long-time friends on OIB have been concerned about the “dumbass remarks” being made, maybe some of the long-time OIB readers have been looking at things through the same set of eyes and are quite comfortable and cozy with the today’s state of affairs in Bridgeport. Other long-time or lifelong residents are not quite as satisfied as you are. As for the comment that some have discussed comments with their attorney, I have absolutely no idea where you are coming from with that statement. I am sure one of these days we will meet in person and reminisce about the last 50 years of Bridgeport.
Hey Lennie, I’ll have whatever Frank is on.
Hey Joel, stay away from the remodeling you are doing. Those paint fumes can be hallucinatory.
Isn’t this amazing!!! The city cannot tell you if your taxes are going up or down but Joe Ganim will guarantee 60% of the residential property owners’ taxes will go down; honestly.
Dumbob, where did Joe say “guarantee?” I’m sure Joe believes the projections are honest. One big difference between JG1 and JG2 is the absence of Jerry Barron. Remember him, Dumbob?
I recently set out to search for the last Fb conversation by chat I had with Jerry before he passed away. We talked about Joe Ganim and I asked him a question about something I’ve always wondered about. I asked what was the formula or trick he used in order to come up with so many years of no budget increases. He gave me the answer and I’m now left wondering if Joe knew the method or if he ever asked Jerry. Jerry told me the only way he would come off retirement was if Joe Ganim became mayor again and asked him to return. Joe Ganim is a very bright man and when he joins other bright people, the results are pretty impressive.
“We have reduced the city’s budget through some of the following measures:
Ø Reducing interest payments by $3.5 million with the refinancing of millions of dollars of city debt.
Ø Instituting a city spending freeze, saving more than $2,000,000.
Ø Reducing the city workforce by approximately 80 employees.
Ø Instituting unpaid furloughs for some employees, and negotiating with city unions concessions to save millions and avoid further layoffs.
Ø Aggressively collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars owed to the city from vendors and other businesses.”
The method to the madness Jerry explained to me is not on the list quoted above. The last one is close but not quite. Jerry told me he carefully looked at the numbers and the problem jumped out at him. Sorry Carolanne Curry, I can’t and won’t tell you the answer.
In his lengthy and self-righteous litany, Ganim stated he eliminated 80 employees as part of his cost-saving measures. Then on the other hand, he hires about 40 of his loyalists and pays them double or better than what the people he laid off were earning. I personally know someone he hired who self-admittedly has little or no experience nor qualifications to properly perform in the position and the salary is close to $100K. Dare I ask how this is a cost-saving measure? That salary alone if I had to guess would be equivalent to two or possibly three people he laid off. Something’s fishy!
Spit that chocolate out of your mouth and tell us the name or shut up.
Perhaps the Joe Ganim statement that appears in the CT Post today, as well as above only appears HONEST because of the DISHONESTY compounded in the FY2016 budget with President Tom McCarthy and the last Council.
You have to grant Joe and his team a real operating budget mess they walked into with the Finch DISHONESTY. However, Joe’s budget presentation has its own “less than OPEN, ACCOUNTABLE and TRANSPARENT” elements:
A) Personnel summaries only show positions with two headings, FILLED or VACANCY. Last year those personnel summaries allowed the Council to understand FTE 2015, FTE 2016, VACant, NEW, UNFilled where we assume FTE stand for Full Time Employee. With all the exiting of former employees, arrival of new employees, and department reorganizations how does diminishing data help the Council?
B) Finch used to brag about decreasing employment during his terms of service and had a chart before every budget presentation. There is NO CHART this year with the proposed budget. Why not?
C) Stick with the Police Department budget and look for honesty, please. Service indicators show decrease in crimes for several years. Splitting the Department into 10 divisions makes it difficult to understand the enormous change in use of overtime and the budget hole that has created.
D) Look at GOALS of hiring two classes of 32 officers and know the class currently in motion shows only 23 people on the City payroll. What’s up? Public Safety presentation is on Thursday evening after FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS will have taken place. Interesting?
E) Police 478 Filled? 17 Vacant? Honestly Joe, whose math is responsible for this presentation? Consultant Chapman, Chief Perez, or some unknown committee of the unknowing?
Can we get more HONEST, Mayor Ganim? Time will tell.
*** CROSS YOUR HEART? ***