|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
I'm not sure the 7 million the state claims the city owes for tax error is included in any of the budgets, or the judgment against the city for the sewer claims to be paid. These figures in themselves are enough to throw either budget out of whack--the mayor's or the city council's--without even giving consideration to income being less than expected!
What's to blame for looming deficit: overspending or lagging tax revenue?
FLINT
THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITION
Saturday, February 02, 2008
By Joe Lawlor
jlawlor@flintjournal.com • 810.766.6312
QUICK TAKE
By the numbers
The city's general fund budget is $70 million.
Expenditures are expected to outpace revenues by about $4 million.
Income tax revenues are down by about 9 percent through November when compared to November 2006.
A deficit of $900,000 is projected for the end of the fiscal year (June 30).
The deficit is the result of about $720,000 being dedicated to operating the city jail, plus about $2.5 million in deficits in other funds that must be covered by the general fund. While that figure does not include layoffs or 10 percent cutbacks, auditors also caution that the financial picture could be worse than anticipated.
Source: Plante & Moran
FLINT - Two rounds of layoffs and now all departments except police and fire are being asked to cut 10 percent of their budgets.
What's going on?
For mayoral critics, it's a desperate response to a government that has become bloated during Mayor Don Williamson's tenure. For Williamson's supporters, it's a prudent response to head off problems, and only the economy is to blame.
The city had a $6.3-million surplus at the beginning of the fiscal year, but that's being whittled away.
Williamson, speaking from his hospital room on Friday at McLaren Regional Medical Center, where he is being treated for flu-like symptoms, said his critics haven't accomplished "2 percent" of what he's done.
"We will meet our budgets," Williamson said.
Councilman Jim Ananich predicted deep cuts, saying the announced cuts don't go far enough.
"It's only going to scratch the surface," Ananich said.
"There's no way they're going to be able to cut enough without cutting police and fire," said Councilman Scott Kincaid.
Administration officials, while not agreeing with council critics, admit it won't be easy to balance the budget.
Peter Dobrzeniecki, the city's finance director, said he's very concerned about the $70-million general fund budget.
"We're going to break our necks to make sure we don't have a deficit," Dobrzeniecki said. "But we're not going to have a lot of money for the beginning of the year." The 2008-09 fiscal year begins in July.
The 10 percent cut, which only affects expenditures for the remaining five months of the fiscal year, will save about $1 million to $2 million, he said.
Dobrzeniecki said he's not sure how much the previous layoffs - including 33 "seasonal and temporary" employees and about a dozen in the building department - would save the city this year. The city has to pay out unemployment insurance, reducing the savings for this year.
Brian Ross, an associate at Plante & Moran, the city's auditors, said the budget could be in deficit by the end of the year. A budget analysis released this week that did not include the layoffs or 10 percent cutbacks showed the city nearly $900,000 in the red.
"It's very likely that number could be higher," Ross said.
Ross also said other nongeneral funds are expected to run a deficit, and the shortfall would have to be covered by the general fund.
City Administrator Darryl Buchanan said the economy is the major culprit. The auditor's analysis showed that income tax revenues were down nearly 9 percent when compared to last year.
"The projected revenues are not coming in," Buchanan said. "This country is in an economic recession, and across-the-board, people are making cuts."
***
---------------------------------
State claims city owes $7 million on tax error
HOMETOWN HEADLINES
FLINT
THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITION
Saturday, December 01, 2007
By Marjory Raymer
mraymer@flintjournal.com • 810.766.6325
FLINT - Collecting on an old debt is not a "money grab" as claimed in a lawsuit, says Treasury Department spokesman Terry Stanton.
The state department is trying to collect $7 million in industrial facilities taxes that the city of Flint improperly distributed to Flint schools from 1994-2000.
In November, the city withheld $1.6 million in funding from the schools - a move that put in jeopardy the school district's ability to meet payroll - to put toward the alleged debt.
The state threatened to withhold state funding for the city to collect the money, but did not order the city to withhold funding from the schools, Stanton said.
Stanton said the state would not benefit from the return of funding because the money would go in the school aid fund, not the city's general fund.
The school district won a temporary restraining order to force the city to return the $1.6 million it had withheld. A hearing on the issue is set for Dec. 17.
***
---------------------------------
Audit stalemate brings state into city's dispute
FLINT
THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITION
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
By Marjory Raymer
mraymer@flintjournal.com • 810.766.6325
FLINT - The state Treasury Department usurped Flint City Council authority Tuesday to ensure the city's finances get checked over as required by law.
Under the City Charter, the City Council has sole authority over the city's annual audit, the start of which has been delayed because of the ongoing budget dispute between City Council and Mayor Don Williamson.
The administration appealed to the state two weeks ago, and filed a lawsuit against City Council to try to force the audit, City Attorney Trachelle Young said.
The Treasury Department stepped in Tuesday
11/20/07.
Deputy State Treasurer Thomas F. Saxton, in a fax sent to Williamson on Tuesday, hired an auditor without council approval. He cited a state law giving the treasury department authority to do so.
Saxton hired the city's traditional auditing firm, Plante & Moran, and the city will be responsible for the cost.
"I don't think it's the best way to do things. I hope it doesn't happen in the future," said Councilman Jim Ananich, chairman of the Finance Committee. "We need to work these things out."
Ananich said he plans to not focus on the state intrusion into city business because he is focused now on rebuilding a working relationship between council and the administration. He said he and Williamson have met and plan to continue to meet to work out differences.
The audit is of the city's finances for the fiscal year that ended June 30 and is due Dec. 31
2007.
"It is evident that each day the City fails to engage a certified public accounting firm increases the likelihood that the city will not be able to timely file its audit," Saxton wrote.
A majority of the council maintains that the current operating budget is at least partially invalid because they believe it was adopted improperly.
The council has steadfastly refused virtually all spending - including the $115,000 set aside for the annual audit - to try to pressure Williamson to negotiate several items.
***
--------------------------------------
Flint City Council balks on '08 budget items
FLINT
THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITION
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
By Lindsey Poisson
lpoisson@flintjournal.com • 810.766.6249
Flint City Council's latest position in the budget standoff with Mayor Don Williamson stands at this:
"Two weeks."
That's how long 2008 budget items will be postponed before council addresses them.
The Finance Committee unanimously held nearly all budget items late Monday afternoon. The earliest those items could be approved is at the July 23 council meeting.
That resistance is meant to send a message through government officials who have "the ear to the mayor," said Councilman Scott Kincaid.
"The bottom line is this: We believe there's no budget for the city of Flint, and the mayor wants to go on spending, spending and spending," he said. "If you (the mayor) don't want to work with the council, then that's fine. Go out and do what you want to do on your own, but if it takes our support, you're not going to get it.'"
But council's decision is wasting "precious dollars" - including a nearly $7-million grant for road improvements, mayoral aide Joe Conroy said.
"That's inappropriate, and it's a bad way to run the city," he said. "They have to approve it in order for us to get it."
Approving a request to apply for the grant Monday was "not critical," Flint Transportation Director Bill Ayre said. He was able to confirm for the council that the deadline for grant applications is after the July 23 meeting.
"In the not-too-distant future, they will have to approve that or we'll lose that money," he said.
Williamson's administration argues that only parts of the budget, approved by council on June 4, were vetoed - an action they claim is allowed by the city's Charter. Items not vetoed went into effect at the start of the fiscal year on July 1, according to the mayor.
But some City Council members argue a partial veto is not possible, and they believe the city does not have an approved budget.
They sent the city's budget information to the state and are waiting to hear if the city currently is operating lawfully,
Councilman Sheldon Neeley said.
"Our single most important responsibility as a council is to oversee the treasury of this city," Neeley said. "Until that time, we are holding true to our responsibility and not spending any of the city of Flint's money."
Some council members say they've tried to address the situation with the mayor - both privately and publicly - but Williamson is not willing to negotiate.
Williamson has said his door is always open to council members to discuss the budget.
"Their response was to sort of taunt us by saying, 'We have a budget, we don't care what you say,'" said Jim Ananich, chairman of the Finance Committee. "If we believe we don't have a budget, then we shouldn't pass any resolutions.
"We can't operate without one, and I'm prepared to postpone until we have one."
***
----------------------
Williamson rejects budget funding more police officers
FLINT
THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITION
Saturday, June 09, 2007
By Bryn Mickle
bmickle@flintjournal.com • 810.766.6383
FLINT -
Mayor Don Williamson has vetoed the budget passed this week by the City Council.
The budget would have funded 25 additional police officers, but also would have also left the city with $225,000 to spend on emergencies.
The mayor's proposed budget would give the city a $4-million fund balance.
Mayoral aide Joe Conroy said the city cannot risk operating with less than a quarter-million dollars in its rainy day fund.
"It's too close to live with," said Conroy.
He said Williamson also objected to the council's demand for a line-item budget.
Giving the council the opportunity to micromanage mayoral spending would result in 6,000 special resolutions a year, said Conroy.
"It takes away the mayor's influence to run the city," said Conroy.
Williamson could not be reached for comment Friday night.
The council could override the mayor's veto with six votes, but that could be tough since the budget passed on a 5-4 vote.
Councilman Jim Ananich believes there will be enough votes for an override.
"I think this budget is fair and responsible," said Ananich.
Ananich said the line-item budget approach gives the council more control and would stop overspending.
"If we don't stop the out-of-control spending, we'll be back where we were," said Ananich.
If the council cannot override the veto, Conroy said the mayor's budget would go forward with the exception of any council items he didn't veto Friday.
Conroy said the mayor rejected adding 25 new police officers, adding Williamson has already taken steps to improve police coverage using existing staff.
In addition to more police officers, the council also added money for a firefighters recruit school, neighborhood cleanups and other projects.
The council has until Friday to override the mayor's veto.
*** |
|
|
Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:00 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Under the City Charter, the City Council has sole authority over the city's annual audit, the start of which has been delayed because of the ongoing budget dispute between City Council and Mayor Don Williamson.
I hate it when reporters read but do not understand what they are reading. If City Council had the SOLE RESPONSIBILITY. Why do they continually argue that we do not have a ratified budget. If the mayor Wrote it. The Council didn't ratify it? HOw is the Council responsible soley?
I must be stupid! |
|
|
|
Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:10 am |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
"Under the City Charter, the City Council has sole authority over the city's annual
audit."
They did not order the audit so the state did.
Council continued to argue whether or not a budget existed even though legal opinions supported there was one, and refused to approve certain expenditures thereby forcing the mayor to use emergency funds to pay bills.
I'm hoping Darryl Buchanan is making some headway as city administrator toward breaking this stalemate. |
|
|
|
Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:56 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
| There That makes more sense! |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:58 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
Something doesn't seem right?
I go to all the Council Meetings. But, I rarely read the journal (unless it's every other line).
I don't remmember the Coucnil ever "NOT WANTING" the City Budget audited. |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:02 am |
|
|
Josh Freeman
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
00SL2 schreef:
"Council continued to argue whether or not a budget existed even though legal opinions supported there was one, and refused to approve certain expenditures thereby forcing the mayor to use emergency funds to pay bills.
Well, this isn't exactly true. The Council didn't force anyone to use "emergency funds" That was something that the Mayor did on his own. For example, there were emergency purchases for golf balls and other misc. things for the golf stores..... He used emergency purchases for full year supplies of different things in various departments. How is a full year's supply an emergency...
As for the legal opinion.. it wasn't conclusive... it said there was a partial budget.... whatever that means.... |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:45 pm |
|
|
last time here
Guest
|
well josh.....don't they sell golf balls too? wouldn't the end result
be a profit? thats good business right? spend some, make more? |
_________________
Guest post |
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:17 pm |
|
|
Josh Freeman
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
last time here schreef:
well josh.....don't they sell golf balls too? wouldn't the end result
be a profit? thats good business right? spend some, make more?
Do you consider that an emergency purchase? Money spent without any check on it. Such a loose definition of emergency ends up getting us in debt again.... as is evidenced in the current situation..... |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:24 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
| Well, that would make sense if there was an expectation to sell those golf balls. However, That should have been in the Budget. So regular budget funds should have been used. Not emergency money! The mayor has been using this Budget all along. ONly making an excuse to use emergency purchases in areas that the Council had already approved spending. yes that's what I said. Already been approved. So to use your arguement that it was needed to make money. That should have already been budgetted for. However, even that arguement doesn't FLY because the golf course is a seperate entity in the Budget. It is supposed to be self suffiecent! Meaning it's budget is not part of the regular budget. It is supposed to pay for itself. Only use general funds in an emergency. Not to buy gold balls. |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:35 pm |
|
|
last time here
Guest
|
hmmmmm. interesting. i guess that depends
on who's definition of "emergency" is used no?? 
or, were you privy to the budget and know for a fact
the golf balls in question had been o.k'd for purchase
by council? 
whether or not some considered the budget correct or
not, the city still had to run no?? what was the guy supposed
to do, nothing?
question. where has the mayor "wasted" money? |
_________________
Guest post |
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:33 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
This we know for a fact!
1. The City Golf Course is it's own entity and is self sufficent. Meaning general Fund dollars are not to be used since it is self supporting.
2. Stock for the shelves of any business should be budgeted for in their initial budget. An old attage. Piss Poor planing on your part does not make for an emergency on mine!
3. ·Emer·gen·cy /ɪˈmɜrdʒənsi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-mur-juhn-see] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, plural -cies, adjective
–noun 1. a sudden, urgent, usually unexpected occurrence or occasion requiring immediate action.
2. a state, esp. of need for help or relief, created by some unexpected event: a weather emergency; a financial emergency.
–adjective 3. granted, used, or for use in an emergency: an emergency leave; emergency lights.
Hmmm, seems as if they didn't know Don's Dictionary http://www.cityofflint.net/definitions_of_don.htm I'm going to have to update it. With Don's defination. Any Suggestions?? |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:59 pm |
|
|
last time here
Guest
|
aw man ted. that dictionary was lame dude......you just hate the guy. 
1. yes, assuming council has approved the expenditure no?
2. same answer as #1.
3. again, same as #1. that council didn't support the mayors
budget was a "unexpected event" no ?
4. same as #3.
the infighting has to stop. peace must be established for the sake
of the city. this argument is about semantics. is there a section in the
city charter with a definition of "emergency expenditures" as it pertains
to running a city?...if not, it seems the designation of an emergency
expenditure is up to the mayor no? |
_________________
Guest post |
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:15 pm |
|
|
Bossman
F L I N T O I D
|
[quote="last time here"]
question. where has the mayor "wasted" money?[/quote]
Well, let's see....we can start with the Inspector/Major/special police for 500k/yr, how about sending out campaign literature on City letterhead with city funds, how about Joe Wilson, or maybe Peggy Cook(does she even know what a City Administrator is?), Gary Hagler(if the mayors going to run the police department he doesn't need to pay Gary for it), or how about the dozen or so dingle berries he has working in his office with made up titles that mean "I don't know what my job is". I could probably keep going, but I think you get the point. Just remember, I predicted months ago that this moron would bankrupt the City. It appears we're well on our way. |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:18 pm |
|
|
Josh Freeman
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
last time here schreef:
is there a section in the city charter with a definition of "emergency expenditures" as it pertains
to running a city?...if not, it seems the designation of an emergency
expenditure is up to the mayor no?
§ 18-21.10 EMERGENCY PURCHASES.
(a) By Director. In case of
an emergency which requires immediate purchase of supplies or contractual services
, the Director shall be empowered to secure by open market procedure as herein set forth, at the lowest obtainable price, any supplies or contractual services regardless of the amount of the expenditure.
(1) Recorded explanation. A full report of the circumstances of an emergency purchase shall be filed immediately by the Director with the City Clerk and shall be entered in the minutes of the City Council and shall be open to public inspection.
(b) By head of department.
In case of emergency which may result in the loss of life or property
the head of any agency may purchase directly any supplies necessary under the circumstances then in existence.
(1) Recorded explanation. The head of such agency shall send to the Director a requisition and a copy of the delivery record together with a full written report of the circumstances of the emergency. The report shall be filed with the City Clerk as provided in subsection (a)(1) above.
(2) Emergency procedure. The Director shall prescribe by rules and regulations the procedure under which emergency purchases by heads of agencies may be made.
(Ord. 2553, passed 4-12-76) |
|
|
|
Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:58 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
I was in Flint a couple weeks ago and every cop I saw was driving around in a new Tahoe. Does Patsy Lou sell Tahoes?
2008 Chevrolet Tahoe
Read Full Expert Review MSRP: $34,630-52,395
Invoice: $31,686-48,727
Some of the local depts up here find these to be acceptable cruisers.
2008 Chevrolet Malibu
More Photos
MSRP:
$19,345 - 26,795
Invoice:
$18,378 - 25,321
Class:
Midsize Car
I guess Flint has a bigger budget.  |
|
|
|
Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:11 am |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
