You want to watch the City Council’s Budget and Appropriations Committee in action this week? Generally what the budget committee recommends the full council adopts. The budget committee, co-chaired by Bob Curwen and Angel dePara, will crunch a lot of numbers and a lot of hours in the coming weeks. The Board of Education is one of several departments on tap this week. The BOE has had a flatline budget the past few years and now says it needs more dough to avoid school closings. Mayor Bill Finch has submitted a budget that calls for no tax increase. Schedule for the week:
April 11, 7 p.m. Registrars – City Clerk – Town Clerk, Wheeler Rooms, City Hall
April 13, 6 p.m. Board of Education (General and Capitol) Wheeler Rooms, City Hall
April 14, 6 p.m. Planning and Economic Development – All Divisions, Wheeler Rooms, City Hall
April 15, 6 p.m. Overview Discussion, Wheeler Rooms, City Hall
April 16, 9:30 a.m. Police – Fire – EOC – Bernhard Center, University of Bridgeport, 10th fl.
A budget committee meeting on a Saturday … at UB? What’s that about? I hope Curwen and DePara don’t get hypnotized by the “Moonies” and do something stupid … like cut out the political cronies.
The City has flatlined and no tax increase is equivalent to a Do Not Resuscitate bracelet.
Grin,
That was poetry. I would be proud to steal that line & use it in the future.
*** Time for a complete independent city budget overview for a better transparent look & needed cuts to move forward towards a questionable future. *** It’s time! ***
When you think how confusing it must be for public-safety personnel to know for sure where their pension plan funding is, how it is doing, and how that relates to their retirement, a special session at a special location may be appropriate.
But what Bob Curwen and Angel DePara might look at in preparation for that meeting is the 2010-11 budget that was proposed by Mayor Finch last year and approved by the Council also. ‘53201 indicates Prin/Interest Pension A for a $15,437,327 line item appropriation for the Police Department. Over in the Fire Department there is a similar account ‘53201 showing $14,831,942. What does this $30 Million of funding represent for City taxpayers?
* Are these amounts the payback to bondholders for the Pension Obligation Bond floated in 2000 to fund Public Safety Pension (so much of which has been lost to the fund in market volatility)?
* Do these amounts include the normal funding of Pension Plan A to handle retiree obligations of approximately $2.8 Million each month ($33,000,000 per year)?
* The City received special consideration from the State of CT in Public Act 09-9 Section 14, in which the City was given temporary relief for contributions to Pension A with a contribution as low as $6 Million. Does this line item include that $6 Million funding? What is the City paying currently? Where is it shown in the Budgets for last year and this year?
The $30 Million referred to above exceeds 10% of our City taxpayer expense budget. It bears understanding and full explanation by Council, Mayor’s Office and OPM. Ask your Council person today, what’s the story? If they voted on it last year, they must know. And if they intend to vote informed this year, they must know.
B2, Please stop! You’re confusing the hell out of Curwen.
JF,
Not to confuse you or anyone, but perhaps a look at the Audit for the 2010 City budget actual results would be helpful. (City site, click on left tab.) Dig into the footnote commentaries about bonding and then pension plans in the middle of this 134-page report and you get a whole lot of info about what should be paid to move the plans to solvency, and what the City actually pays. Significantly less. Tens of millions less so far, and increasing.
So if trustees are responsible for the funding for 600 or more retirees or their survivors who served the City for many years in a public-safety position, what is actually being done by Mayor Finch who serves as a trustee but also wears a hat as Mayor?
All of a sudden it seems he has a real conflict of interest in that telling the public the whole story belies his “budget cutting” rhetoric. The biggest accomplishment is to defer major Plan A contributions he and his advisers know would require extraordinary current tax increases. Voters, especially in an election year, do not like tax increases, so keeping this secret is important and this administration has done so for several years.
However if people in this Plan A were to start asking questions about the “real planning” contemplated by the City and to raise the issue of conflicted responsibilities on the part of a trustee, the Mayor might find it more convenient not to have fiduciary responsibilities. And if he knows about planning realities about Plan A, wearing his Mayor’s hat, but there is little or no evidence in the trustee meetings about such facts and concerns as may be raised by looking at other City documents, is he living up to his fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries of Plan A? Mayor Finch may ask Mark A or John F for an opinion. Perhaps he might like to share the answer with the public. … As well as the full story on Pension Plan A … It would stop a lot of speculation.
Aren’t DePara and Curwen employees of the city as well as aldermen? Isn’t there a bit of conflict here? Perhaps we should ask Tom McCarthy (the President of the City Council, labor lawyer for the City of Bridgeport, and district leader in the DTC).
A bit edgy Lennie? N’est–ce pas?