There’s nothing more annoying that reading materials for a meeting and then finding out they were discussing something entirely different that wasn’t available to the public. Bad. public. transparency.You can watch along here – its starts around 1:18 in the initial file, when the staff modifies it – the time will probably change.
Here’s the updated schedule!
CAPITAL BUDGET SCHEDULE
Changes to budget schedule
May 4th – Agency Budget Kick Off (was April 6th)
May 12th -FC Briefing on Following Topics:
- Review Agency Guidance for 2021 Capital Budget & CIP
June 12th – Agency Capital Request Due (was May 13th)
June 19th – Agency Capital Requests Published on line
Didn’t Change
September 1st – Executive Budget Introduced at Common Council
September 8 & 9– Agency Capital Hearings
September 14 – 18 – Finance Committee Capital Amendment Week, amendments published at noon on September 18th.
September 21 – Finance Committee Votes on Capital Amendments
November 2 – 6 – Council Amendment Week: Amendments published at non on November 6th.
November 10 – 12 – Budget Adoption
Disappeared from Budget Schedule
June 8th – Finance Committee Briefing: Agency Capital Request Overview and Discussion of the City’s Bond Rating
OPERATING BUDGET SCHEDULE
Changes to budget schedule
May 12 – Finance Committee Briefing: 2021 Operating Outlook & Personnel Cost Projections (was May 11)
July 20 – Finance Committee Briefing:
Was about: Revenue Options for 2021 Budget & Levy Limit/State Aid Overview
Now: Agency Operating Request Overview
July 27 –
Was: Finance Committee Briefing: Agency Operating Request Overview
Now: Service Levels & the 2021 Budget
Didn’t Change
June 1 – Agency Budget Kickoff
June 8 – Finance Committee Briefing: Review Agency Guidance for 2021 Operating Budget
July 10 – Agency Operating Requests Due
October 6 – Executive Budget Introduced at Common Council Agency Operating Hearings
October 12 & 13 – Operating Budget Overview, Agency Operating Hearings
October 19 – 23 – Finance Committee Operating Amendment Week; Amendments published at noon on Oct. 23rd
October 26th – Finance Committee votes on Operating Budget Amendments
November 2 – 6 – Council Amendment Week: Amendments published at non on November 6th.
November 10 – 12 – Budget Adoption
BUDGET RESOLUTION (Pre-amendment)
Here’s the link. Konkel comments below, because I couldn’t not point out the obvious.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby establishes the following rules and procedures for the deliberation of the 2021 Executive Operating and Capital Budgets as amended by the Finance Committee:
1) All proposed amendments to be reviewed and distributed in advance of the Common Council meeting must be submitted to the Finance Department (Room 406 City-County Building) no later than 4:30pm on Wednesday, November 6th, 2019. The Finance Department staff will prepare fiscal notes and distribute a list of the proposed amendments by Friday, November 8th, 2019, at 12:00 noon.
2) In the case of amendments from the floor of the Council, members may consider an amendment to a proposed amendment as well as other amendments that are written and distributed to Council members.
3) Proposed amendments must have two sponsors to be considered by the Council.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the above rules shall be in effect for the deliberation of the 2021 Capital and Operating Budgets on Tuesday, November 12th, Wednesday, November 13th, and Thursday, November 14th, if meetings are held.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that any rules or procedures that are inconsistent with the above rules are suspended for these meetings pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.34 of the Madison General Ordinances.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The attached 2021 Budget Calendar identifies the proposed schedule for consideration of the 2021 Budget, including dates for Public Hearings before the Common Council. (Originally attached, newly attached)
FINANCE COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Questions of staff
Alder Barbara Harrington-McKinney asks if there has been a consideration or discussion about setting a time limit. She says there are three dates proposed for their deliberations – 11th, 12th and 13th and she wonders if three is an ending time, 11:00 or 12:00? It’s very challenging to make wise decisions at 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning. Has that come up for discussion or where is the appropriateness of that.
Laura Larsen from the Finance Department says that is at the discretion of the body, it is up to the council to approve any potential end times for the meetings. We could do it via this resolution or it could be done when we get closer to the deliberations and we know how many amendments are scheduled to be taken up.
Harrington-McKinney asks if it is a friendly amendment to add that consideration? Going through the process of making those kind of decisions that impact the budget of the city and its 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning is just not viable and we’ve been in that situation before. What is the process of adding a time limit of that whether its 12:00 or noon, what is the consideration and how do we move that forward for the body to consider.
[NOTE: GOODFUCKINGGRIEF – She’s been on the council since 2015, and served as the council vice president – she should know how to make a motion by now!]
Larsen suggests that if that is something that you would like to explicitly propose as part of this resolution that you make that motion and have the body vote on that.
Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway says that after they are through with questions for staff to move an amendment to the resolution.
Alder Mike Verveer asks about attached tentative budget calendar. He recalls that the finance director has shared with the committee a month ago that the capital budget kick-off would be delayed until late May. Obviously the date on the calendar included in the packet has come and gone. Will we have an updated calendar available to the council in the near future and have they set the date of the capital budget agency kickoff.
Larsen says that was an error on her part, she will update the attachment in Legistar. The capital budget process is slated to kick off next Tuesday, May 5th and then the date on that calendar should be that on May 12th the next meeting of this committee, we would give a more complete outlook of the 2021 operating budget along with the guidance that was provided to agencies.
Verveer says great, then you do have an updated calendar that you can share with us yet this evening? She says yes and she will take care of that right away.
Verveer also asks about the Common Council Executive Committee (CCEC) discussion about the budget process that occurred several months ago, could staff enlighten us a little further is on the thoughts about the new proposed Finance Committee briefings of agency budget requests, prior to the Mayor working on the Executive Budget.
Larsen says that in February they appeared at CCEC to discuss council perspectives on ways they could continue to engage the council more in the budget process. At the direction of that conversation, our goal was to develop a schedule where we could have more frequent check-ins with the finance committee about the status of the budget process and where we are in the process as well as providing more updates around changes and assumptions regarding that outlook for the upcoming year. With the updated calendar that we’ve outlined, with the exception of the lost month of April from kicking the process back, we’ve been able to maintain all of the briefings that we had initially scheduled with the attempt of adding more deliberate and updated information about where we are in the budget planning process. To provide more ongoing updates to alders. Another objective of this process is to formalize what has been an informal process of notifying alders when agency budget requests are published and available online. In the past that has been something that has been communicated to you via email from her or council staff. By having these check-ins at the finance committee, having the status of the agency requests in terms of publishing as part of the agenda, it will be a touch point so everyone on finance, and the entire council are aware of where we are in the planning process.
[NOTE: Updates are great, but um, I think the council was saying they wanted early input, not just updates and spin. And that they wanted input prior to the agency instructions being sent out, to participate in those decisions.]
Verveer asks about the check-ins, which he thinks are a nice innovation, would division and department heads and budget contacts be expected to attend these agency request overviews? A mini early form of the agency budget hearings, or is that not the case, is the idea that only you and your colleagues in the finance department would provide these overviews so all the staff we not expected to attend these early overviews.
Larsen says it was not their intent that staff would attend those overview sessions. Our intent was more along the lines that they would provide high level summaries of the policy implications of what they are seeing in the agency requests so that you all are aware and if there are more specific items in an agencies budgets they could include that in one of the briefing sessions.
Verveer says that when they have the budget kickoff meeting next month they should fully explain the new budget calendar additions to the staff so they are not thinking there are two capital agency hearings and two operating budget hearings before the finance committee. It will be the way they have grown accustomed to it in terms of their participation at the table. He presumes some of them may have the same question he had.
Discussion/Amendment
The Mayor asks Harrington-McKinney if she would like to move the language suggested by Attorney May.
Harrington-McKinney makes a motion to add:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the November 12, 13 and 14 meetings of the Council shall recess or adjourn not later than 12:00 am (Midnight) unless the council by a 2/3 vote agrees to extend the time of recess to a different time.
Alder Sheri Carter seconds. The mayor points out they all have the language in their email.
Alder Keith Furman appreciates the intent, but won’t support it. Agrees we don’t make decisions late at night, but thinks they can adjourn at any point in the budget meeting, and he would rather see them do that than run into issues by having to take a vote. He agrees we should not be making decisions at 1:00, 2:00, 3:00 in the morning, no good comes of that, but he does not thing that is the right process.
Carter says having gong through quite a number of budget hearings, she can say that for the first time that they even took a vote to leave was at 3:00 in the morning that we decided to table the budget hearing, back in 2016, just to come back the next day, and that was at 3:00 in the morning. Last year we did take a vote, Alder Bidar kept saying its 11:00, its 12:00 etc. I think we got out around 12:00, other than that, we’ve been going the distance, quite frankly. It’s naive to say that we can monitor the situation when I can only recall twice and quite frankly at 3:00 we might as well have went to 7:00 so she is going to support this. She would prefer it not be midnight, but midnight is better than nothing and she will support this. If we want to stay later we can definitely have a vote on that, but its nice to know that by midnight we will be coming back the next day.
Furman suggests that on the 3rd day, he doesn’t want to be in a situation where we still haven’t passed our budgets and we’re relying on a 2/3 vote to keep the meeting going, I think we may have notice issues and rescheduling issues and so obviously if we reach that length of having three days and we can’t get 2/3 vote to go past midnight I think we are going to be in a lot of trouble and he’d like to not see us in that position, so if the finance committee decides to pass this he would at least then suggest that they don’t do that on the 3rd day.
Yes, scheduling a new meeting is a pain, but if its that big of a deal, you’ll have the 2/3 vote at that time. As much as alders and others have complained for years, when it comes down to it, alders would rather stay and finish than come back another night.
Mayor asks if there is any desire to change the motion to remove the night of the 14th from the limitation.
Carter says that she believes they can remove the date of the 14th.
Harrington-McKinney doesn’t object, but she is thinking about Alder Furman’s concerns about completing our work. The reason I put forward the recommendation to consider a time limit is that our constituents always ask how we can make decisions about the city and the budget going forward at 2:00 and 3:00 in the morning. Her concern was to institute the 12:00, she doens’t have any leaning either way if they should take the 14th off. If we complete before the 14th, great, if it goes to the 14th that is ok. She is not going to add the friendly amendment, she is going to let the body vote it up and down, her concern was the time.
Alder City Attorney Mike May “would like to weigh in” says the mayor- he says as a procedural matter, Alder Fuman has a point, and he didn’t think about the problem on the 3rd night that they actually do have to complete the budge on that night. He thinks he’s got a good point that if they limit it to midnight on the first two nights you’ll be making good decisions but if you absolutely have to finish the budget, you may have to go until 2:00 in the morning. Recently they have not been more than 2 nights, hopefully that won’t be the case this year.
Mayor says Harrington-McKinney says that the procedural motion before us is whether it is friendly to the body and that needs to include every member of the body, including you, to remove from your amendment the Nov. 14th date and the reason for doing that is that if we are in a situation where they use all three nights, and we are not done by midnight on the last night, it is preferable, generally, to go past mid-night than to pause and re-notice another day which would postpone the adoption of the budget by multiple days and we’re up against a deadline as going as late as the 14th. She asks if there is any objection the friendly amendment.
There is no objection. Mayor asks if they can record a unanimous vote in favor of the amendment.
There is no further discussion. They record a unanimous vote. However, the legistar item still says:
There was no change to the language that is in legistar???
