In typical HN form the article is a mish mash of revenue source numbers and appropriation figures that fit about as well as a 10,000 piece jig-saw puzzle, and they make just as much sense. There is no way to really tell what this administration is planning, or how responsible and realistic this budget is in meeting community needs next fiscal year, nor is it possible to gain insight into future planning by this administration on the basis of the numbers discussed in the HN. This presentation of the FY11 budget is in no way a credible and comprehensive picture of the City's looming financial situation.
For example, it's the future inability of the City to meet it's fixed cost items, like Debt Service, Health Insurance, and Retirement that will dictate how successful the City will be in balancing next fiscal years, and all future fiscal year's budgets. But the article never mentions these items. That begs questions like, "Have the unions backed potentially going to the GIC Health Insurance alternative?", "Is the City prepared to tackle the issue of Retiree Health Insurance future liability?", "When will we begin to meet our Unfunded Pension Liability obligations if we keep putting off payment due to budget needs?" , and " We're building new schools, and paying for ones already built, what does the Debt Service Schedule tell us about how much debt has been payed off and can we afford even the small portion we have to pay after the state portion of the debt is paid?"
These are very critical questions because our obligations in the near future are having an impact, as they always do, on the current year's budget proposal! So a full presentation and discussion of these items are of crucial importance.
Don't expect the HN to ask those questions. The HN reporters merely report, they do not investigate. And they do not fully comprehend the budget or the budget process.
It is all really kept in Medieval silence until it is sprung upon people by the June 1 deadline. The City Council never receives it in time for meaningful research on the major cost items like Health Insurance or Retirement. This attempt by the Mayor to have a public forum on the budget is not to get information or gain insight on it's budget - that proposed budget will NOT change no matter what information is presented at the public forum. Rather, the forum is a "binky" of sorts, meant to allow the more boisterous among the concerned public a chance to vent and babble and then , in all honesty, just go away, as far as the Mayor's office is concerned, all protestations by the Mayor aside. By dint of office, every act by the Mayor is a calculated one, a political one. At this point they don't want any real input by the citizens - it would just slow their process, their timetable.
I would actually like to see their revenue estimates first, a true full discussion of sources, continuing and new, and any changes from the prior year and why. This is critical, as opposed to expense items, because under MA law, you can only spend what you can raise in revenues. Everything depends on the revenue bottom line.
From the revenue bottom line you would begin to offset by the amount of known fixed cost items. These would be broken down in detail, like how many enrollees, by department, have what kind of health plan and what the associated plan cost is that the City would pay, totaled, to render a group insurance fixed cost. With all the fixed cost items the devil is in the details and the details must be published.
After all these fixed costs are determined, the difference between the revenue bottom line and fixed costs is what you have left to spend on the day-to-day operating budget. There is no other way to do this budget process. I'm sure the Finance Director has done this.
There is NO WAY Mr. Cadime had a meaningful role to play in constructing this budget. He simply hasn't been working as City Administrator for a long enough period of time. This go around, he is merely a mouthpiece for the Mayor. I'm sure the Mayor wants Cadime to be the public face of the budget to present a budget the Mayor thinks is good work. It may be more of a calculation than this Mayor wants to make. If the budget is flawed in a serious manner, Cadime's reputation will be ruined and his ability to perform as City Administrator will suffer greatly.
Given a lack of detail to examine for a day or two, no one, even those with a background in budgeting, could tell you definitively one way or the other whether this submitted appropriation request is comprehensive and solid. it's simply impossible. But we do know that several important questions loom that will dictate the efficacy of this budget.
These revolve primarily around the role of the employee unions, the firefighters in particular, and whether they will take the 8% pay cuts other unions have accepted in the past, and which the Mayor expects them all to take for at least another year. This is a huge assumption. It is the cornerstone of the Mayor's entire budget being balanced. One has to wonder aloud if the Mayor has obtained the agreement of the Police and Fire unions on this matter, and whether the School Committee, which the Mayor chairs, has likewise done with Teachers and School Administrator's bargaining units. It would not surprise me if this was already settled behind the scenes. But it would also not surprise me if he did not do so.
The presentation of this now UNBALANCED budget in the public manner used does several things. First, it serves notice now that all taxes and fees will be going up and will be maximized where ever possible. Stating that fact often over the course of the next couple of months will serve to reduce the public psychological impact when the boom if lowered.
Second, it serves as a way to paint the unions as the bad guys if they don't agree with further pay cuts. It's a statement that the budget is balanced as long as THOSE GUYS do what I think should be done. Once again, no matter who the Mayor is, he hopes to balance the budget on the backs of the City's employees. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Finally, this Mayor getting his budget message out in the friendly HN, using confusing and disparate categories of revenue source increases and appropriation requests does precisely what the administration wants most at the present - muddy the waters with good, if not true, news, and keep the people from asking for and examining the details. It also sets in motion the public sentiment to support the Mayor's request ad at the same time puts pressure on the City Council and Unions to go along with it.
Based on what this administration has done with City finances so far, I do not have great hopes that this budget is balanced and that we will not be putting out several fires in the coming months based on deficits in various accounts, and actual FY10 operating deficits being carried very quietly on the Cherry Sheet Charges section of the FY 11 Tax Rate Recapitulatulation Sheet. We already know they plan to do this with sewer deficit carry forwards. They may also have to do this for Police overtime. The public has a right to know why these deficits occurred and how they will be prevented in the future. That discussion should be presented and had in public.
So, what do we have on our hands so far? The Mayor has submitted a budget that is not balanced due to assumptions about union salary figures and the 8% cut carry-forward and no discussion of any meaningful details within the Fixed Cost categories. The budget was published in the Mayor friendly HN, and reads like an announcement of a new family cruise to Disney World. What else could we expect in Fall River.
Let's see what the public forum brings forth.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment