Community Services Takes a Hit In City Budget

So much for taking poverty seriously. As needs and expenses go up, agencies are looking at decreases. Again, for the geeks and those from agencies affected . . . and all their clients. The real issue here is that most non-profits will see a 5% decrease in funding.

THE COUNCIL AVOIDS RESPONSIBILITY
First, the common council has pretty much abdicated their responsibility in this area and left it entirely up to the Community Services Committee (should be renamed Commission if the Council won’t touch their decisions) and the Community Development Block Grant Commission. They essentially won’t touch their recommendations. So, expect them to say they can’t do anything about this. I think that is wrong, very, very wrong. They are avoiding the responsibility for our community because its too hard to look at – and I don’t blame them on one hand, since it is hard. But, um, that is why they get the “big bucks” – to make the tough decisions and I don’t think they should get away with this.

ULTIMATELY, THE MAYOR DECIDES
So, the mayor decided the Community Services budget should be cut by 5%, they council had no say in that.

The mayor also decided that after most agencies got a 5% decrease, some agencies and projects were important, so funding was restored for them
– They mayor decided that neighborhood centers are a priority and should not get the same cuts as the other agencies. (Note: they did not have to reapply for their funding like the other agencies did this year. They were separated out and will have their own process – so they don’t need to compete in the process that had 5% cuts.)
– The mayor decided that community gardens are a priority and should not get the same cuts as other agencies.

The mayor also decided that after most agencies got a 5% decrease, some agencies deserved a new program.
– The mayor decided to fund a new youth program for Mentoring Positives.
– The mayor decided to fund a new youth employment program at Centro Hispano.
– The mayor decided to fund a new at-risk youth program at Journey Mental Health.
– The mayor decided to fund a new aging program at Outreach.

The mayor also decided that peration Fresh Start should get city fund to better match their funding with fund source requirements.

The mayor also decided to provide $57,278 in City funds for an rfp for coordinated intake for homeless

The mayor also decided to provides additional funds for DAIS to help ramp up for services at their new expanded center.

The mayor also decided to provide additional funds for the Urban League to expand their adult job services.

Yes, the mayor decided all that. Despite all the freaky reliance on the flawed funding processes at the committees and the alders saying its all hands off, the mayor had no problem jumping in and deciding his priorities. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not judging his priorities, I’m just saying that all the emphasis on “being fair” and “process” goes out the window at budget time no matter what anyone says and yet the council largely won’t get involved and just gives away their power to help decide priorities.

BUDGET INFORMATION SUCKS
All that above information is not in the budget. Here is what the budget tells you about all this.

Community Development Division
1. An addition of approximately $50,000 intotal net levy support for programs administered by CDBG and the Community Development Division (CDD). This is the first year the two-year funding cycle for Community Agency programs. Detailed program allocations as recommended by the Community Services Committees can be found at the following website or by request to the CDD Office www.cityofmadison.com/cdbg/docs/2013_CDD_contracts.pdf

2. A transfer of levy funding of approximately $1.6M from the Community Development Division to CDBG for funding related to Neighborhood Center and related programming.

3.The transfer of the Grant Writer position to the Finance Office, as approved via a 2012 budget amendment.

4.No reduction in funding for Child Care Tuition Aid and Child Care Grants.

Community Development Block Grant
1. An addition of approximately $50,000 in total net levy support for programs administered by CDBG and the Community Development Division (CDD). This is the first year the two-year funding cycle for Community Agency programs. Detailed program allocations as recommended by the CDBG Committee can be found at the following website or by request to the CDD Office: www.cityofmadison.com/cdbg/docs/2013_CDD_contracts.pdf

2. A transfer of levy funding of approximately $1.6M from the Community Development Division to CDBG for funding related to Neighborhood Center and related programming.

3. No change in the anticipated level of Federal HUD and other grant funding, which is sufficient to support CDBG operations. However, unresolved Federal budget issues may require funding adjustments if Federal grant awards are reduced for 2013. If more funding becomes available, funding will be allocated to programs according to a supplementary “B-list” for Federal fund allocations as recommended by the CDBG Committee. This “B-list” can be found at the web link noted in Highlight #1, or by request to the CDBG Office.

4. A reduction of approximately $4.6M in Federal Department of Energy grant revenues associated with the Green Energy program. However, the presented reduction is a reflection of the anticipated loan amounts that the CDBG Office might process in 2013, rather than an actual reduction in the total DOE grant award of approximately $7.2M, which remains in tact.

5.This budget includes authorization to allocate reprogrammed and other HUD-approved funds for continuing CDBG, HOME, and ESG funded projects for the first two quarters of 2013, through revisions to previously approved Action Plans, and allocate later-approved funds to those or to new projects during the latter part of the year, (provided the total budgeted amount per project does not exceed the amount approved by the Common Council upon the adoption of the 2013 budget) if HUD were unable to provide for the release of the year 2013 CDBG, HOME, or ESG funds by January 1, 2013.

What do we learn from the budget information
Very little. If you click on the link you don’t see the “B-list” that is mentioned, at least you didn’t when I looked at it, but I supposed they could change that information. That list also doesn’t say what was originally requested by the agencies, what the committee recommended and how the mayor changed those recommendations. So, the information is largely useless. Here is the original document, as I’m viewing it this morning while writing the post.

While there is an increase, many agencies will be getting a cut this year. I don’t have that list, not sure if it exists. There will be no cost of living increases for agencies for another two years – so while all our costs go up, we just have to suck it up, again.

Neighborhood Center funding is going back to CDBG . . . instead of Community Services.

The grant writer for community services is now a city grant writer.

Child care services run by the city won’t get the same 5% cut that the outside providers get.

I’m not entirely sure what the language on the HUD funding means, but I think that it means that if HUD changes its funding levels the funding levels will change. Not sure if there is a change in process or procedure from the language, it is possible that the ESG grants no longer need to go to the council for approval.

All those changes Mayor Dave didn’t understand are annoying because now we don’t have good budget information for 2011 and its hard to compare to previous years, even if you go back and look at previous budgets.

BOTTOM LINE
I’m not sure, because I’m not sure I’m working with good information, but I do know that that the council has decided they don’t care, don’t want to get involved, don’t want to deal with the hard issues. I think the mayor has decided he knows what he wants. The committees are stuck dealing with not enough money, too many requests and real needs. I think they are used as a pawn in a political process I’m pretty sure they don’t entirely understand (and how could they.) I think there was a real power grab by staff to make sure that they make the real decisions – but I’m not sure that worked in some cases – more so on the Community Services side. Meanwhile, the non-profits are too busy doing the work they need to do to spend any more time on an already lengthy process and most are probably completely in the dark and just suck up the losses every year because its not worth precious time to get involved.

i.e. process still broken after spending way too many hours talking about the process and changing the process midstream.

A clear vote of no-confidence all the way around from me. The process isn’t fair – and I say that even tho the Tenant Resource Center sometimes benefits from the process because I participate, stay til the end of the meetings, apply for additional funding at strategic times and know how the system works. It’s still not fair.