Mini rantish kind of paragraph to follow . . .
I wonder how much input the council had in determining what the goals would be. They should have said that they only wanted him to raise taxes 3%, so they had 2% to play with, instead of .2% if they agreed on the goal of 5% being fiscally responsible. Where’d that number come from? The Mayor doesn’t really see them as equals, does he? 20 council members representing all areas of the city, and their impact on the budget and programs that they think might be important .2%. I hope they have a bigger impact than that, and maybe they’ll even find things to cut. But, I’m sure he set them up, to restore funding and look bad. That’s the way the game is played. Give them awful decisions and not many options so they leave the Mayor’s budget alone. Ok, rant done, for now. This process just makes for bad community discussion about a budget.
Here’s his email to alders:
From: Mayor
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:18 AM
To: ALL ALDERS
Cc: MY GROUP
Subject: 2011 Operating BudgetDear Colleagues,
Attached find a summary of my 2011 Operating Budget proposal. I hope you will find that it presents a reasonable balance between maintaining basic services and expanding community services and other proactive measures, while restraining overall spending and property tax increases.
My budget would require a 2.9% increase on the levy and a 4.8% increase in taxes on the average house, slightly more than last year but close to the 15 year average for Madison.
While I respect the Council’s role in shaping the budget from this point forward, I hope you can join me in being fiscally responsible by:
* Keeping the tax increase below 5% on the average home.
* Not tapping into the city’s fund balance.The first goal is important as we need to recognize that while our residents value their services, they also are having an increasingly difficult time paying their taxes as the recession drags on. The second goal is important because the city’s fund balance is one important element in maintaining our Aaa bond rating. That, in turn, has resulted in historically low borrowing costs for the city, meaning less strain on our operating budget.
I am always happy to hear your thoughts on the budget, so please don’t hesitate to call if you have general comments or specific ideas.
Sincerely,
Dave Cieslewicz
Nice, now that I’m done, I’d like to hear from you. And by the way, this is the goal your success will be measured by. Too bad they didn’t have an open discussion about goals and priorities and what success would be. Could you imagine that, the council and mayor sitting down and talking about what their goals and priorities for the city are and how those goals and priorities will be reflected in the budget? I wonder how the budget might be different as a result. Especially if they tried to agree on long term goals for the city and what might get them there.
Anyways, here’s the budget. No time to analyze it and tell you what I think yet, it usually takes a good week to realize what it all means.
