It’s a question city fiscal watchdog John Marshall Lee has growled dozens of times in addressing the City Council, the legislative and budget-approving authority that is supposed to provide a check on the executive branch. Lee Monday night reiterated the declaration.
Until Bridgeport has a sustainable governance structure and processes, with checks and balances for the benefit of all residents, we will need watchdogs. What moves me to stand in front of your body twice a month for years and raise things to your attention with stories and questions is covered in that one simple sentence. Let me repeat it to you slowly, so that its full content and meaning are not lost.
Until Bridgeport has a sustainable governance structure and processes, with checks and balances for the benefit of all residents, we will need watchdogs.
Regarding “sustainable structure,” our current form of decision making in a poor urban City does not listen well to the voices of the people and then they fail to vote. Open process for using their voice would look differently in the composition of Boards and Commissions, their encouragement to continuing education and high standards, and providing time and interest to the goal of increased communication with the public.
In my opinion “transparent” process and accountability would look very different from today where 1% or fewer of the public can understand the unnecessarily complicated financial yet on the whole, incomplete fiscal reporting provided by City Hall. Without a Finance Board, with expertise and credibility, how do we trust the decisions of this body that let some people enjoy 100% of City services while taxing them at a fraction of that percent for decades into the future?
“For the benefits of all residents” sounds good to my ears and perhaps to yours also. However, when was the last time that “taxpayers” who may be young or old, poor or advantaged, and come in all colors, religions and cultural persuasions or philosophies, were regarded in your deliberations?
On Election Day I spoke with a former Mayor of a CT city in the New Haven region at the polls. He stated that our problem in Bridgeport were those of you who may have conflicts of interest because of your own or a relative’s City employment. He saw the conflict of interest. His answer: pass a law. When I shared with him that our City Charter was on the books already, and that local legal interpretation allowed the behavior to continue he was surprised. When I asked him whether he had an Internal Auditor to work on fiscal controls, he said yes. I told him that we lost ours years ago and have been getting neither an annual purchasing report nor triennial audit because there is no Internal Auditor. The Ordinance on the books for about two decades has not caused the Council to come to its rescue.
Finally I asked him did his city have a Finance Board and he said they did. I told him Bridgeport does not have such a body. And he looked me in the eye and said: “Where are your checks and balances?” And I said: “Exactly.”
Within one month the General Election will take place. What advances has your body made in the past two years to move us towards more sustainable governance? What have you done to provide more checks and balances or processes to have government work more fairly for all of the people? What have you done to advance the cause of monitoring, review, oversight or watchdog activity where it is needed?
• How has the gun buyback program been funded? Public $$ from which budgets? Where are the Purchase Orders?
• July tax payments this July covered only 37% of the annual budget. Is this a reason for any concern with the state of the economy?
• Whether you trust the current administration’s fiscal activity or not, there will be a new administration soon. How do you trust and verify fiscal matters?
• A previous speaker tonight, a retired registered nurse from NY who is attempting to work with youth in our city, wondered why she must wait for a June payment from Lighthouse after providing 15 programs per semester as a vendor. And I wonder why does that same program fail to declare annual fee revenue of $850,000 from parents and families when they present their budget to the City Council annuallyWatchdogs? Time will tell.
We used to have a Board of Finance. It was called the board of apportionment and taxation, it was chaired by Mario Testa and it was a joke. Indeed, the council looks fiscally responsible by comparison.
Putting more blocks on an organization chart won’t change a basic truth about democracy: any government is only as good as the people you elect. Stay tuned.
Boards of finance have played a significant role in Connecticut’s local governments since the
idea of a citizen board to control and supervise municipal expenditures was originated at the turn
of this century. Today, 126 municipalities–from the smallest rural town to the largest cities–have a board of finance as part of their governmental organization. The activities of these boards
extend into almost every phase of municipal finance administration. In towns operating under the
general statutes, the board of finance performs all of the administrative tasks involved in budget
preparation, requesting, and receiving budget estimates, compiling the budget document, and
presenting it to the legislative body. In addition, the board is responsible for the town’s
accounting system, preparing the annual town report, and providing for the annual municipal
audit. In more populous towns and cities with a number of administrative departments, the board
may be relieved of administrative duties by a professionally staffed finance department. In many large cities the board may be referred to as the board of apportionment and taxation. The significance of its role as representative of the citizenry in the budget-making process, and its responsibility for making final budget recommendations the legislative body, are not diminished.
Source:
“Handbook for Connecticut Boards of Finance: A Guide to the General Statutes & Principles of Financial Administration” by George E. Hill, Extension Professor, Institute of Public Service, University of Connecticut.
www .ctsprague.org/resources/handbook_for_connecticut_boards_of_finance_ocr.pdf
Phil, you are partly right. I was the last chair of the board of apportionment. After that, due to a vote by the public, the board was abolished and all their duties and oversight was given to the common council. The board was apolitical. The budget, mil rate and any line item changes had to be voted on by the board.
Sorry Stu. I remember the Board as ineffective, unaccountable and largely silent as the city slipped into the worst financial crisis of its history.
I was elected to the city council when the Board of Apportionment and Taxation was abolished and its duties moved to the city council. At the time, the Sate of Connecticut provided oversight in the form of the Financial Review Board. There was scrutiny at a level now completely absent. I have often lamented the lessons lost since then. Along with the issue of conflict of interest, how to recreate confidence in the City’s financial transparency is one mayoral candidates should be expected to weigh in on.
Precisely, Tom White. Thank you!
Vote for John Marshall Lee! Vote for John Marshall Lee! Vote for John Marshall Lee!