I initiated requests for detailed budget in August, yet through ‘miscommunications’ did not get an actual response until 9/5 or 9/6. I was told they didn’t have time to make copies now due to other copy jobs needed for the city commissioners. Mine would be ready 9/11 (9/12 first public hearing date). I again requested an electronic copy as an alternative and again was told that would not be possible. The budget I picked up from the city was dated May, which was the one used for the initial budget workshop. By 9/12, a more current budget (dated Aug 26) was posted online- not sure what date, but it was likely within 1-4 days of meeting. Not the same detail as my May budget. So I couldn’t get the budget delivered in electronic format when I asked, I paid for an out of date budget, and then they posted the latest budget while I was waiting to pay for copies of the old one!
– The May budget contains errors with numbers not adding up when cross-referencing sections.
– Since I accidentally missed the budget meeting ( I did not see the alert changing the time due to Jewish holiday), I called our mayor and he was more than obliging to review my concerns.
– We discussed inconsistencies, concerns, and general questions. Fred amazed me with his knowledge on many minute details! Below are the questionable items I think worthy of sharing:
– In 2005 we reduced the finance/admin/city clerk staff by ONE yet we continue to carry the staff “REGULAR SALARY†(about $42,000), for that headcount last year and this year. WHERE’S THE MONEY GOING?
– The library has been closed for one year, yet we used the same budget last year for books and subscriptions and will again this year. As noted here , if the expenditures are accurate for budgeting and actual spending, then we should have a reduction this year. We have $79,000 in the capital budget for BOOKS, plus the usual $80,000 books budget (which is not really all books).
– HIDDEN REVENUES NOT BUDGETED, BUT ALWAYS SPENT: Historically, since 2001, we have collected a minimum of $38,000 and up to $286,000 (admittedly included unusual collection) in fines and forfeitures. This year we have only budgeted $34,000. From 2001-2006: $97185, $38900, $122,235, $39412, $286456, $99830. 2007 projected- $185600. The philosophy is that we are not going to budget on fines and forfeitures because we want to ‘work things out’. I agree wholeheartedly with that philosophy. The reality is we collect money every year, and to budget anything less than a 7-yeear historical low, is under representing revenues. This is just one example that I see of under budgeting revenues vs historical numbers and it leads to higher taxes being collected than is warranted. This leads to the question- We always spend all the money collected- so why are these numbers reported in any ‘overview’? Secondly, if we don’t want to budget for the money, we should have an agreed upon plan for how ’EXTRA’ money should spent. For example, maybe all monies should go into the contingency fund, unless other approval obtained. Or maybe they should go towards reducing next years taxes.
– SUGGESTION: The tennis center is not completely self sufficient so we all contribute to the cost of running it. I recommend that 2X per year we open the tennis to the public for 10 days ( to include 2 weekends) so that all get a chance to enjoy even if not a member ( and maybe more will join too).
– $40,000 allocated for Marina Drive/ 26th Ave road repair- delayed due to Marina construction. $40,000 also to come from Pompano to help pay for their lousy work. There is no indication where this money is carried over to this year. The project is not on the list of projects for 2007-08.
– We reduced the ad valorem from $7290205 in May to new number now.
budget actual 2008 budget
AD VALOREM TAXES $6,750,000 $6,985,024 $6,511,887
– Did the property appraiser give that number reduction change? Most cities will have an increase this year because property value declines are not expected to be seen in the market until Fall 2008. This is potentially a huge gap and I am concerned where the revised
– Revenue projections: police, fire, library, recreation, fines/forfeitures are typically the lowest in 5 years, below the trend, or conflict with data presented in other budget pages.
– At $2,000,000 we have built up our contingency fund over the last two years, yet we are expected to have lower interest earnings. In my personal banking/financial world, interest income rates are up 300-500% over just a few years ago.
– With artificially deflated revenue projections, the city is ramped up again to take in significantly more revenues than in the budget.
## end mayor conversation##