Grinding Out Budget Info

The City Council’s Budget and Appropriations Committee conducted a public hearing Wednesday night. Citizen fiscal watchdog John Marshall Lee was there and shared these remarks that included a bunch of suggestions as they deliberate the mayor’s proposed budget.

Council Members, Charter Chapter 9 covers Budget and Fiscal controls. Section 6 addresses the Capital Budget where Section 6 instructs you: “The city council shall solicit suggestions, comments and recommendations from city officials and the members of the public regarding the proposed capital budget and shall conduct at least one public hearing.” Historically, there has not been such a meeting annually in the past eight years. Look at the old records to assist your memories. When did you formally “solicit suggestions” through legal notices, comments to constituents or in social media? If you think you have done so, where are the people of Bridgeport tonight? Who is failing whom? How do you restore trust in this Council body?

On Monday evening I attended your Budget session for its duration and raised my hand to ask one question. I was informed that as a group you have decided not to allow public input on any evening at which you hear from Departments, enter into broader discussions, receive additional information from departments including Finance and OPM that you mark as exhibits, and begin to form impressions of what your response will be. Instead, as in past years you will channel all public comment into one, two or three sessions to “hear” your public. And at those meetings you will make no response for reasons that only you know in your hearts and heads. But I suggest that it is patently disrespectful and the public feels it.

Perhaps your concerns are about saving time, but I believe that you purposely wish to maintain barriers to facts as to better practices, information about City miscues, and exposure to concepts other than those that you already hold. How will you extend the competency of this body? How will you keep your collective eyes on all of the revenues the City receives? How will you focus on how many dollars are used to pay for old services including debt repayment and retirement funding for former City employees that covers no current needs?

Listening to the discussions for most of the past two evenings indicates to me that you would be assisted by:
· A listing of all departments as structured in the approved current budget with employee headings used in past budget proposals (though not last year) like FILL, VACANT, Unfilled, NEW with totals and summary including for full time pay per department would have been a helpful starting point. A “cheat sheet” if you will. A second listing would show Mayor Ganim’s budget reforms in the same fashion. Compare and contrast off the listing and use the budget book for more detail. Footnotes explaining complexities, for instance the removal of extra pay for additional duties used in the past to get around salary levels, would be used. Such a listing whether offered to you initially or requested by you subsequently would show the actual “shrinkage” or “expansion” of City payroll relative to past years.
· An addendum to the “Departmental employment listing” that would indicate where Grant revenues are used in the current year as well as contemplated in the next year to fund personnel, full time, part time or seasonal, with an indication of which Federal, State or other grant source is actually providing revenue and for what time period if other than a full fiscal year. Since Grant revenues at this time are not shown at Operating budget time or on monthly financial reports though we receive over $200 million of such funds annually, isn’t an exhibit of their role in the City important for understanding? Why does this revenue become secret?
· A statement that you may have received but I have not seen showing where the proposed budget expenses have been projected at $250,000 or more increase or where revenues are projected to reduce by $250,000 relative to last year. This would keep the big picture goal in mind when it comes to budget cutting and warn you of changes that you can easily question. When the budget increases faster than the taxable grand list as has happened in past years, we go deeper into the red, with both higher overall property taxes as well as with real estate values reduced in the marketplace.
· Since tonight is intended to focus on your decision to approve more than $40 million added debt, can you explain why you are supporting debt repayment periods longer than the “public work of a permanent nature” or “purchase of equipment of a lasting character” language of the Charter suggests? What alternatives of shorter term funding can be used to mirror the ways you purchase cars for your family? If you do not waste money on 20-year borrowing instead of 5-6 year financing, why make that decision for the City? Another information request for regular public disclosure would be that each department conducting any capital project with borrowed money will supply an Executive level summary of the funding status at least quarterly to the Budget and Appropriations Committee for monitoring. Why vote on new funds when you have no clue as to what has been happening to existing projects and funding? (Think about the illegal transfer of Capital funds from OPED last November. What have you initiated as a body to research that issue? What exists of your power to vote on transfers of funds? Do you know? Have you had such discussions for the record?
· Where is the detail for the listed Capital additions to Education, OPED, Public Safety, etc. presented in a from with quantity, time lines, nature of gain or loss form doing or ignoring for the public to consider before 20 years of debt is approved?
· For several years I have seen that the Lighthouse program spends a total amount of funds, from the City, from parent fees and from State and Federal grants on fewer than 3,000 of City youth, though there are 22,000 in the public school system. (More than $4 Million annually for 15% of City youth is a separate question that needs an answer, but when you cannot see all the revenue sources with the Department presentation, no one would know to ask such a question.) Specifically I was concerned that the department continues to show the receipt of NO REVENUE in their department budget though their own reports indicate that parents and families pay $850,000 of fees each year. When I pay a fee to the City Clerk office I can see that my check shows up as revenue in a monthly financial report. Why are significant amounts of fee revenues from families treated differently? It was disclosed that the fee income goes into a “special fund” rather than the General Fund so that they remain dedicated to the program, but who monitors the Fund and are there variances from year to year?
· (I have read the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report each year in recent years and can recall no specific mention of a “Lighthouse special fund.” What other accounts are used to reserve fees, fines or non-tax revenue and why is there no public accounting to B&A on a regular basis? Is this what the City is encouraging action on for “blight revenues?” The purpose in that instance seems reasonable, but where are the financial results shown for watchdogs to see?)
· Where is the June 30, 2015 FINAL monthly financial report? In the period of the past 25 years we have only seen such a report in 2013 and 2014. It was this document that revealed the behavior of 15 Council members who without notice, or a scheduled meeting, or minutes for their gathering, used nearly $30,000 of taxpayer funds to personally reward local charities in an election year from the Other Services fund, though no services were received by the taxpayers, the City Council or the City itself. A final report should be automatic and it needs to follow the release of the appropriate CAFR-15 released in mid-February. Who will request the release of such report today?
· The City is underwater in its operating budget this year. Has the Council bought a bill of goods from City finance officials for years while enjoying pizza and cokes with them but shutting out any disagreeing messages from outside? As the taxable Grand list has reduced (but when does the Council reference it), the City budget continues to increase, and you will now have to wrestle with the issue of BOE 2017 operating budget shortfall of $15 Million as you represent 10 districts with all of the 22,000 youths. What will you do? Where will you stake out territory to cut budgets? How have you bothered to inform yourselves over the years when you attend conferences that must include “budgeting” as a subject? Where can you demonstrate your learning of best practices from these stipend-funded junkets? Where are your reports posted on the City website?

The “red boots” are symbols of a City governance system that has lost its financial way. Personally  I have a sense that the new administration budget has stripped away some forms of compensation, some personnel who were unnecessary to certain tasks, and eliminated some supervisory or management personnel without compromising department missions and those types of changes have been required for some time. However, the Council behavior has failed in its responsibilities:
· The lack of executive level regular reports coming to you for monitoring;
· The way you have sat for more than three years without any formal legislative assistance after the termination of your former legislative assistant (yet the City still pays someone in the City Clerk’s office who bears that title);
· Your failure to monitor existing ordinances to see where they call for specific behavior that is not happening, Ex. Stipends, purchasing, etc. Are revisions required?
· Reports at least annually, perhaps at budget time, by all Council members who have liaison responsibilities to Departments, Boards and Commissions. Why have liaisons otherwise?

The “red boots” symbols are not the fault of politics, as we have only one party in operation in the City. The fiscal failings and fault are to be blamed on people seeking an easy way at each turn, to be loved by all, and by ignoring the tough analysis for and firm representation of those who elect you, the taxpayers. Evidence some cutting behavior of your own as you compare the many “needs” in the City. State your priorities and see how the community responds. Get more people out to see you working and producing a reversal in our financial flameout. Get tired in doing the public work if you wish to gain respect as public servants. Time will tell.