I posted this to the Inter-Neighborhood Council list, but i thought i'd share it here. There's been some discussion about the priorities in the budget this year, with arts and other non-profits, which have traditionally been funded by the city, getting a much smaller piece of the pie in the proposed budget. And that's even before the cuts that Mayor Bell has asked City Manager Patrick Baker to make, to reduce the proposed increase in the property tax rate to 3 cents, from 5 and a half cents.
Mike Shiflett made the point that:
With ever increasing demands on providing basic services (police & fire protection, minimum housing code enforcement, roads, sewer and water, trash pickup/yard waste, other services) residents need to understand that there is not an unlimited amount of money to go around.
. . .
The Non-City Agency funding changes being implemented by the City Council are attempting to address this.
emphasis mine.
There's the rub. Read the news articles and you'd get the impression that staff came up with this idea all by themselves. But this is, as far as i am aware, a policy decision made by Council some time ago.
Why wasn't this communicated to the non-profits before the funding cycle began? For that matter, why wasn't the 54 cent property tax limit communicated to staff
before the budget cycle began? If Council had a tax increase limit in mind, wouldn't it have made sense to let the manager and budget director know
before they put the budget together? Or does someone actually think that by rejecting the proposed budget, our elected leaders look as though they are standing up for the taxpayers?
Really, the whole budget process this year has been disgraceful.
UPDATE: Several people have written to me explaining that the city staff did in fact communicate with the NCAs about the changes they could expect in funding levels and priorities in this and subsequent budget cycles. The suggestion is that NCA staff may not have communicated the seriousness of the city in implementing these changes to their Boards, with the result being the highly public clamor among these groups for more funds from the city.
Could be.
My thinking is that the city could have perhaps been a bit more proactive in letting the public and the people who use the services provided by the NCAs know about these changes as well. I don't necessarily oppose limiting the time frame in which local non-profits can expect to be funded by the city, or the levels of support they can expect to receive. But somewhere in the process this year, something broke. And the result is that everyone looks bad.
Labels: City Council, city manager, local government
Continue reading Budget