City Budget: Where it’s at . . . (Part III: Operating Budget)

All that, for $1.03 increase over the Mayor’s budget (with changes made at the Board of Estimates) on the average homeowner’s tax bill . . . have mercy on my grammar etc today . . . I’m a little tired, but here it is . . . .

The first motion of the evening was to place the following items on file:

• Amendment #7 – cutting $100,000 for the downtown safety initiative
• Amendment #8 – cutting $300,000 from the affordable housing trust fund
• Amendment #9 – cutting $200,000 from the affordable housing trust fund
• Amendment #10 – adding $200,000 to the affordable housing trust fund (Ald. King added that in there as a show of good will)
  
• Amendment #12 – cutting funding for the police department Management Information Specialist and adding money for overtime actually added $4,250
• Amendment #14 – cutting $4,579 from the Common Council budget
• Amendment #15 – cutting $10,013 from the Mayor’s budget
• Amendment #18 – requiring us to to zero-based budgeting
• Amendment #19 – cutting $8,008 for an Occupational Accommodations Specialist
• Amendment #32 – cutting $37,531 from various afterschool and summer youth programs and childcare
• Amendment #33 – cutting $89,200 from the agency that would replace the Women’s Transit Authority
• Amendment #34 – cutting $44,375 for the ARC Community Services/Respect program (prostitute rehabilitation)
• Amendment #37 – cutting funding to existing planning councils by dividing their money among 4 planning councils instead of three

Ald. Brandon, knowing he didn’t have the votes, offered to essentially withdraw those items from consideration. Needless to say, it was unanimous. And we all appreciate Ald. Brandon’s decision to do that and the good nature in which he took the bit of teasing we gave to him. That couldn’t have been easy.

Amendment #11 – A substitute motion was made to do the following:

Increase General Fund Room Tax Revenue by $350,000 from $683,200 to $1,033,200 and provide Room Tax Funding of $350,000 to decrease the General Fund subsidy to the Overture Center.

This effectively uses 1/2 of the additional revenue generated by increasing the Room Tax rate from 8% to 9% to reduce the property tax levy. This amendment also results in a decrease of $350,000 in the projected balance available in the Room Tax Fund at the end of 2007.

This amendment included a “Footnote to council members: Those voting “YES” last year…Konkel, Cnare, Verveer, Webber, Olson, Brandon, King, Golden, Benford, Palm (Gruber excused). And he’s right, last year, I made essentially the same motion(s).

Amendment #10 – Agency/Service: Room Tax Fund/Estimated Total Room Tax Receipts – Page(s): 16
Sponsor(s): Alds. Konkel, King

Raise the Room tax by .5 percent (from 8 percent to 8.5 percent).

Room Tax Receipts (Increase) $ (430,000)
Total $ (430,000) Levy Impact: $ –
(Note: Funding is in the Room Tax Fund; therefore, there is no impact on the levy.)
Amendment No. 11

Agency/Service: Room Tax Fund/Transfer to Overture Center
Page(s): 16, 78; Supplement page 73
Sponsor(s): Alds. Konkel, King

Provide Room Tax funding of $430,000 to decrease the General Fund subsidy to the Overture Center.

Room Tax Uses/Other $ 4 30,000
Overture/Trf. From Room Tax (new) $ (430,000)
Total $ – Levy Impact: $(430,000)

This year, the votes were as follows:
Yes – Webber, Benford, Brandon, Cnare, Golden, Gruber, King, Konkel, Palm, Sanborn, Skidmore
No – Bruer, Compton, Knox, Olson, Radomski, Rosas, Thomas, VanRooy, Verveer

Interesting set of flip-flops.

Amendment #13 – The original amendment would have made the 10 new police officers neighborhood officers. After asking the police chief some questions about previous police staffing committees and the plan for how they were spending the $50,000 for a staffing study, I offered the following substitute:

A police staffing subcommittee shall be established by the Common Council to review the police staffing report funded in the 2007 budget, if completed, and shall make recommendations to the Common Council and Police Chief which shall include, but not be limited to recommendations regarding the number of neighborhood officers, the staffing levels for Community Policing Teams and other community policing initiatives. This committee shall report back to the Common Council by October 1, 2007.

There were several amendments and friendly amendments to this and we voted on if the language should just say:

A committee shall be established by the Common Council to provide input in the creation of a the police staffing report funded in the 2007 budget.

That motion failed on a voice vote.

Then we went back to the substitute language above. At issue was whether the Council gets input into major policing philosophy changes or if we just hire the police cheif and let him make the decisions. I was hoping we could have a community discussion about what community policing means to us. However, that motion failed. Votes were as follows:
Yes – Webber, Benford, King, Konkel, Olson, Sanborn, Skidmore, Verveer
No – Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Gruber, Knox, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Thomas, VanRooy
Present: Golden (this essentially means they don’t cast a vote in favor or against)

Amendment #16 – $19,371 for AASPIRE interns – passed on a voice vote

Amendment #17 – $10,000 for sign language interpreters – passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #20 – There was a substitute motion that add 2 arborists instead of the 6 that were originally proposed. I’ll have to find that motion and come back and fill in the details. The motion passed on a voice vote

Amendment #22 – Raised admission prices for the pool. $.25 for children, $.50 for adults and $10 for seasonal passes. The motion passed.
Yes: Benford, Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Golden, Knox, Olson, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, VanRooy, Verveer
No: Webber, Gruber, King, Konkel, Rosas

Amendment #23 – This amendment was originally in the motion to place on file by Ald. Brandon, but Ald. King pulled it out of that motion. It would have saved $15,000 and then spent $500 for the fans. It would have had no impact on the taxpayer as the saved money would have gone into a reserve for the Pool. The motion would have denied air conditioning to the concession stands at the swimming pool and instead, put in fans. The discussion was about if we owed it to our hot sweaty employees to provide air conditioning in a place that was often over 100 degrees and air condition the outdoors, or if we should save money and have unhappy, uncomfortable employees working in miserable conditions. It was a tough one for many. Alders Webber and Golden voted present/abstained. The motion failed.
Yes: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, King, Palm, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas
No: Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Radomski, VanRooy, Verveer

Amendment #24 – $5,000 for AASPIRE intern for the Office of the Director of Planning and Development. Passed on a voice vote without comment.

Amendment #25 – There was a substitute to the proposed amendment that would have referred the reorganization of the Department of Planning and Development to the Common Council Organizational Committee. That amendment read as follows:

Department of Planning and Development Reorganization:

1. The Budget is intended to make the necessary financial changes to allow the Department of Planning and Development reorganization to go forward.

2. Implementation of the department and unit name changes and the creation of the proposed Economic Development Unit to be made up of the Office of Business Resources, the current Community and Economic Development Unit, Real Estate, Community Development Block Grant Office, Office of Community Services and the Senior Center shall be subject to further approval of the Common Council by majority vote. These issues will be taken up when the Common Council considers ordinance #04859. Ordinance #04859 is hereby additionally referred to the Plan Commission. Rejection or alterations of the ordinance shall be accomplished by a simple majority vote. Rejection or alterations will not require a budget amendment.

3. The issue of Neighborhood Services shall be further studied by a joint committee of two (2) plan commissioners, two (2) Community Development Block Grant commissioners, two (2) members of the Office of Community Services commissioners and 1 mayoral appointment. This group shall study services to neighborhoods and, after consulting with planning councils and neighborhood associations, report their recommendations to the Common Council by June 1, 2007 for consideration in the 2008 budget. This committee shall be staffed by the Director of Planning and Development and/or his designee.

This passed without comment on a voice vote.

Amendment #26 – $50,000 for neighborhood planning grants. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #27 – $5,000 for “Jobs with a Future”. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #28 – $41,280 for a “Neighborhood Ombudsman. This was placed on file because of Amendment #25 in hopes that the committee in #3 can discuss this and make a recommendation.

Amendment #29 – $18,920 in savings because it will take time to hire the new Neighborhood Planner. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #30 – $25,000 for the Salvation Army for the warming shelter. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #31 – $30,000 for the Wisconsin Youth Company for running a neighborhood center and afterschool child care programming. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #35 – $21,000 to TlJ. Brokerage Firm to provide 12-week life skills training program for low-income or disadvantaged adults. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment # 36 – $33,000 for the Westside Planning Council. Alot of discussion on this one. Mostly the issue was whether they were ready and/or if there was enough support. Motion passed.
Yes: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Rosas, VanRooy, Verveer
No: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Golden, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas

Amendment #38 – $23,000 for the Neighborhood House for a half-time program assistant. This was a long and tortured discussion that had more to do with how we decide what to fund than the needs of the over-worked staff at the Neighborhood House. Most bizarre comment of the evening to me was when Ald. Cindy Thomas, after getting $30,000 for her neighborhood center in her district, launched into a tirade about how we can’t fund things outside of the CDBG and Office of Community Services process. Motion passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #40 – $10,000 for adult and children’s programming at the Library.
Yes: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Rosas, Verveer
No: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, VanRooy

Amendment #41 – This one was introduced from the floor by Ald. Cnare and Olson. Passed on a voice vote.

Allocate $43,000 from the former Women’s Transit Authority ride service 2006 unused money to support start-up costs for the transportation service provider that will be selected after a formal RFP process. The allocation must be matched by donations of cash or materials/supplies secured by the selected provider. In the event no provider is selected, the City’s $43,000 will revert to the General Fund.

Amendment #42 – This one was introduced from the floor by Ald. King. The following motion passed on a voice vote. The following people added their names as a co-sponsors – Mayor Cieslewicz, Golden, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Knox, Konkel, Rosas, VanRooy, Verveer, Webber.

Final vote on the budget.
Yes: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Cnare, Golden, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Sanborn, VanRooy, Verveer
No: Brandon, Compton, Skidmore, Thomas

And what did all of this get us . . .
We increased spending by $471,000.
We increased revenues by $350,000
So, we increased the amount we need to tax by $121,784
This is a total 5.1% total increase
The mill rate is at 7.2138
The taxes on the average home (about 239,500) is $1727 for the City’s portion
The council actions increased the mayor’s budget by .022% or increased the taxes on the average home by $1.03.

More to come, after I get some sleep . . . .