Friday, May 25, 2012

Budget Comes Up Short by $1.5 Million

Errors and omissions in the administration's 2012 budget will force the governing body to find ways to come up with an additional $1.5 million or more in revenues, a City Council discussion revealed Thursday.

A state review of the budget statement introduced in March revealed the flaws, consultant David Kochel said. Errors included $550,000 allocated for various kinds of insurance when the actual amount should have been $1.7 million, Kochel said. In addition, individuals were left out of the budget, including a prosecutor and Municipal Court staff as well as police personnel.

Adjustments must also be made for salary increases due to union settlements. Former CFO Ron Zilinski put less in the 2011 budget for retroactive pay than was adjusted, Kochel said. Even 2011 employees who have since left must receive the retroactive pay for that year, he said.

The budget had come in below two state-imposed caps, but now, he said, "When you add up all things, it is well over the spending cap."

Kochel also expressed concern about the tax rate, but he did not have the current one and so could not project the impact of the shortfall. Storch questioned whether layoffs might be needed, but Kochel said the personnel and civil service process was so long, perhaps 60 to 90 days, that savings would be minimal..

The revelation followed a calm start to the meeting. Council members Cory Storch, William Reid, Rebecca Williams and Council President Adrian Mapp were present and Annie McWilliams, Vera Greaves and Bridget Rivers were absent. Public Works & Urban Development Director  Eric Jackson was standing in for City Administrator Eric Berry, who is off until June 2.  Finance Director Al Restaino was absent due to his mother's surgery. Three members of the Citizens Budget Advisory Committee attended the meeting.

 Those present began by discussing the timetable for budget adoption, which had been projected for late May. But once the glitches were revealed, talks became more heated. Reid asked how the errors happened and questioned the roles of the chief finance officer and city administrator. He attempted to excuse the mayor, but Storch said, "Councilman Reid, you know better," and said the mayor has the ultimate responsibility for the budget.

"Nobody should run for mayor unless they know what they're doing," Storch said.

The CBAC began attending six budget sessions starting April 12, but when member Jan Massey found out the administration knew of the errors by April 5, she said the committee would have taken a different approach had they known.

"What a waste of time," Massey said.

With budget deliberations concluded, the CBAC was at the point of formulating its report to the council.

In light of the new information, the council's Finance Committee will now meet at 5 p.m. May 29 before the 7 p.m. Ward 1 Town meeting. Plans call for a special meeting on May 31 at which the Finance Committee will present its recommendations to the full council. At another special meeting on June 6, the council hopes to adopt amendments. The agenda-fixing session is June 12 and the council hopes to pass the budget on June 18.

Among choices to bridge the budget gap, the governing body may use surplus from the six-month transition year and Kochel said he will be looking to trim non-salary expenses. The mayor's proposed 40 percent cut in library funding may also come up again.

"Quite frankly, to me this budget is such a mess ... I can't make sense out of what we have in front of us until we put all the numbers together," Mapp said.

--Bernice

9 comments:

  1. LOL... too funny. Seriously, this is worth laughing over, again.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is not funny--it is serious business. The folks who are supposed to be in charge are once again showing their incompetence and sloppiness. I am incensed that information was not given to us in a timely fashion. I agree with Jan Massey that a great deal of time has been wasted. As one of the other CBAC members stated, these folks get paid a lot of money (six-figure salaries) for perpetual mediocrity. It makes it all the more infuriating that the administration has a posting for NINE (9) new civil service positions for "Senior Computer Service Technicians" under the Department of Administration, Finance, Health and Social Services at an hourly salary range of $25.67 to 34.15! How on earth can something so ridiculous be justified, when the IT Director himself stated in his budget presentation that he only needed 3 IT techs? To the layperson, the administration appears to be playing fast and loose with the public's money. I asked, on the record, for an answer to this question--that answer will be given publicly, on the record, by the administration. By sending the council such a sloppy, incorrect budget, the administration has done a real disservice to the people of this city. It is inconceivable that the city administrator would not be present for this most critical aspect of a budget he is responsible for presenting and explaining to the governing body. It is not right for the administration to keep playing musical chairs with these "acting" titles--frankly, it is an affront to the people of this city.

    Rebecca

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca.. I disagree.

      It's not an affront to the people in the city of Plainfield. They wanted her, they got exactly what they asked for 2X.

      Why is this news here? (any other place it would be)

      Ask Mapp and Storch why supporting a "party line" isn't looking so smart now. I have commended you repeatedly for your intelligence, your hard work, your dedication and your commitment to the City of Plainfield. You see the group of people who sit next to you on the city council and you see the Mayor. Ask them all why this is news. Ask them why anyone of you would purport to be surprised. Ask any of them how they expected anything different. Ask all of them collectively who supports the way things are. Ask all of them who has the courage to change and change Plainfield. You'll have your answer and I don't think you'll like it.

      Delete
  3. Those Republicans are at it again !! Lets get an All-Democratic Party to really fix this town !!

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's times like this when I'm happy to be a former Plainfielder

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous has jokes, but the biggest joke is in City Hall. Instead of "Shady Sharonda", maybe "Lazy Sharonda" is better. She is an embarrassment to everyone in Plainfield and once again proves why she is the worst mayor in the state. Instead of a skull and crossbones flying over city hall, put Sharon's face with the crossbones and we have a real ensign of danger. If anyone can try to justify this, then they need to be voted out for being of low moral fiber or run out of town on a splintery rail. The joke is on us and the joke is Sharon Robinson-Briggs.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Fire the council

    ReplyDelete
  7. The budget problems come down to two problems: salaries and staffing levels. It is death by a thousand lashes. What's a few percent salary increase every year? What's a few more personnel? Well it builds up and mounts up until the residents are buried under the tax burden.

    Kochel's response to Mr. Storch's query about lay-offs, recognizing that lay-offs unfortunately hurt people, is typical of short-term thinking that gets any administration in trouble over time. He said the savings in 2012 would be minimal, the implication being "so why bother." Well lay-offs even at the end of this year will make next and all future years' budgets easier to manage.

    BTW where did the city get the $1 million to install the "Shotspotter" system or the annual expenditures to operate it? Plainfield was in no condition to try extravagant, unproven technology, and now the money is not available for "necessities." Thanks alot, city council.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually the city took a $169,000 lease plan: http://ptalker2.blogspot.com/2011/08/council-approves-shotspotter-plan.html

      Delete