Commentary on the 2016 Budget Process

Interested members of the public are awaiting announcement of budget deliberation dates, but meanwhile a comment by the proposed Citizens' Budget Advisory Committee chairman makes one wonder how objective the process will be.

Some may say everything in Plainfield is political, so what's new?

It is true that politics are the meat in the Queen City's bag of sliders, if I may invoke that image. But sometimes the politics are hard to stomach, especially before the June primary.

At the March 7 City Council meeting, Sal Carrano announced he has been named to CBAC and chosen to be chairman. He complimented the administration on improving the tax collection rate to 97 percent, as noted in a budget presentation earlier in the meeting. On March 14, he reiterated that he was chairman of CBAC, but said, "I don't like double talk. I don't like shell games."

Citing a lot of figures related to the budget presentation, especially regarding an $8.5 million surplus amount, Carrano said, "I don't want my time wasted examining this budget."

Whoops. Has he already decided budget deliberations will be a waste of time? Will entering into budget talks with a high degree of suspicion color the process?

Here's the lineup for the 2016 CBAC:

Eric Graham, named to the committee by Councilwoman Gloria Taylor

Sal Carrano, named by Councilwoman Tracey Brown

Thomas Crownover, named by Councilwoman Rebecca Williams

Delois Dameron, named by Councilwoman Diane Toliver

Leighton St. Patrick Williams, named by Councilman Barry Goode

Alma Blanco, named by Councilwoman Bridget Rivers

Nathan Vaughn, named by Council President Cory Storch

The CBAC members receive the same comprehensive budget information that the council gets and share in the process of interviewing department and division heads before amendments are formulated. The CBAC chairman delivers a report to the council at the end of deliberations. Though not binding on the governing body, the CBAC conclusions hold some weight.

Amendments must be advertised and a public hearing is held before final passage. Once passed, the budget stands for the rest of the year, with some transfers permitted near the end of the year if needed.

At times there have been moves to make a political spectacle out of the budget process, with the aim of crippling the administrative branch or singling out individuals for retribution. On paper, as noted by 2015 CBAC Chairman Tom Kaercher, the process is more straight-forward. From his report:

First, the Council gave the CBAC five specific goals:
1. Compare Plainfield’s budget expenses, revenues, and service to municipalities of similar size and demographics.
2. Identify possibilities for shared service agreements similar communities have agreed to.
3. Identify core services, as defined by residents, and rank in their priority order
4. Identify structural budget imbalances caused by one time measures and recommend strategies to eliminate them
5. Make a set of budget recommendations for the 2015 Calendar Year Budget.

Because the process was compressed to two weeks and only covered 11 of 36 budget categories, the 2015 CBAC could not meet all the goals, Kaercher said. 

This year an earlier start seems possible, but if CBAC members approach the task with skepticism or preconceived notions that it is a sham, why bother? It is, after all, the governing body's duty to deal with the budget once it is introduced:

From Article V of the charter:
5.6 Action by the council.

(a) The council shall consider the executive budget, make available for public distribution copies of the budget document, and cause a budget ordinance to be introduced, published and hearing thereon held pursuant to the local budget law.

(b) The council may increase, decrease, or eliminate any item in the executive budget for current operating expenses, except that it may not increase any item unless, upon separate motion as to each increase, 2/3 of the members of the council shall vote in favor thereof.


(c) The council may include, exclude, increase, or decrease a capital outlay or capital project contained in the executive budget, and may add capital outlays and capital projects thereto. Any capital outlay or project not included in the executive budget shall be referred to the planning board for a report and recommendation prior to council's action thereon. The planning board shall report within 30 days and may recommend either that the project or outlay be approved or that it be disapproved or deferred. In the event that the planning board should recommend that the project or outlay be disapproved or deferred, such project or outlay shall not be included in the budget adopted by the council except upon a favorable vote of 2/3 of the members of the council, upon separate motion as to each project or outlay. If the planning board should fail to report within 30 days, it shall be deemed to recommend approval. The requirements of this section shall be in addition to any imposed by the Municipal Planning Act (1953) and the local budget law.

This year, a lot more people, including developers, have their eyes on Plainfield. What will they see in the 2016 budget process, an objective approach to fiscal responsibility or political "crabs in a barrel"?

--Bernice