Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Mapp, Berry Square Off Over Budget

A rift between the City Council and the administration widened Tuesday when City Administrator Eric Berry sent three letters to the state Department of Community Affairs protesting council budget decisions and calling on the state to intercede. Council President Adrian Mapp called the letters "appalling" and said one "misrepresented" what happened at one council meeting.

One letter objected to reductions in funds for the corporation counsel's office and to inclusion of $50,000 in the council's budget for legal representation a dissolution study on the PMUA. Another repeated objections to the $50,000 and alleged an improper vote for its inclusion in the budget. The third alluded to problems in the budget that the administration presented to the governing body, blaming the former chief financial officer for the errors and omissions, and honing n especially on library funding. The introduced budget allocated $1.6 million for support of the Plainfield Public Library, but during budget talks, the administration sought to cut the amount to the state minimum of $926,516.76. The council not only approved the $1.6 million, but rounded off a library request for an additional $66,000 to $70,000 for a total of $1,706,577. Berry protested in his letter that the library has nearly $2 million in assets and made other arguments for the minimum allocation.

Mapp said Tuesday the state has agreed to permit the $50,000 addition to the council's "other expense"  line and that the budget as amended may go on to final passage.

Councilwoman Rebecca Williams objected to Berry's characterization of a council majority attempting "to mortgage the future of the city," but Berry said based on some of the council decisions, "That's the way I feel."

Mapp questioned whether Berry wrote the letters himself and Berry said he did.

The council has already passed amendments and a public hearing and final passage of the budget are expected on June 18.

Although not named in Berry's correspondence with the state, the "former CFO" is Ron Zilinski, who served through the end of the budget year that ended on June 30, 2011, and throughout a six-month "transition year" from July 1 to Dec. 31, 2011. Zilinski quit in January just as the city was starting a new calendar year budget. The city hired a part-time CFO in February and is just now on the verge of appointing a new full-time CFO. Meanwhile, budget consultant David Kochel uncovered the errors and omissions and also came up with strategies to fix them, reflected in a long list of amendments passed at a June 6 special meeting.

--Bernice

7 comments:

  1. Its a good thing that the City Council wants to separate the counsel for the administration and the council. Once again, Sharon has her dirty hands in the pie. Anyone want a slice?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Since Mr. Berry had so much to say, it seems to me he would have been here for the budget hearings instead of on vacation. How he gets so much vacation after such a short time should be something he questioned in his letters (probably dictated by her honor)to the State. I think he should have been on his job and not on vacation, now he wants to come back running things, why don't he run back to Trenton and point to others when answers are needed. Although I suppose he was told to take vacation so as not to be available to answer any budget questions just like the PMUA members can conveniently be absent to vote on the big payouts and council members being absent when important votes are needed. When is this City going to hire people with some scruples?

    VL

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with 10:18 regarding Mr. Berry. He's been on the job for a hot second and it's apparent that he has already tasted the kool-aid by these actions he has fessed up to. His answers last night were not with any conviction and he certainly did not speak up when he answered which would lead me to believe he didn't believe what he was swearing to on the record. Why is he falling on his sword so soon? He hasn't been in his position long enough to owe any one any favors just yet. So if he is picking sides, why wouldn't he pick the tax paying, law abiding citizens instead of the crooks in city hall?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am incensed that Mr. Berry would spout off in a letter to the Division of Local Government Services about a process he was barely present at--he said that council members in a 6-1 vote regarding the library budget amendment were being "political"--yet offered no explanation for this outlandish, insulting, and totally out-of-line claim. The DLGS doesn't do line item vetoes of municipal budgets--one would think that competent administrators would know that, and would not send embarrassingly inaccurate and misleading correspondence to a state agency. For him to inject politics into a letter about our city budget demonstrates...you fill in the word.

    Rebecca

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just what I want. A city administrator who makes decisions on how he "feels" rather than facts and logic. We are in trouble now, people.

    We have 3 council members who do not think at all other than what the administration wants.

    We will soon have a 4th who knows even less. Some members of the public may like to know that Tracy was at the PMUA meeting and left before the vote was taken. Just what we need, another one who can't make up her own mind, and a coward at that I might add.

    Add to the circus the City Administrator who makes decisions by what he feels, when he shows up.

    Heaven help us!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. My only surprise is that people are surprised or shocked. That truly is cracking me up.
    That library is going to pay BIG TIME when Brown gets on City Council.
    Congrats to the party line voters.
    They better hold onto those assets for the lean years when the Mayor will get her way and slash that budget to the bone.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am so sick of the mess going on in this city and our current Administration. Mr. Berry sent letters regarding decisions he wasn't there to hear, perhaps if he came to the budget hearings he would have know what was going on. How could a new employee get 3 weeks vacation so soon and I bet it was a paid vacation. He probably wrote the letters as a pay back for the early vacation, he goes away during a very important time for the city. We should've all known that if the mayor put him in office there is something behind it. I do you a favor (go on vacation NOW) and you do me a favor (letters with false accusations)No surprise to me. There is a surprise though keep your eyes open because I'm so sick of this mess I think I'll run for Mayor myself next year and I have NO political ties...

    KS

    ReplyDelete