Mayor Sam Wright presented his third version of a proposed budget to council members.
Wright said the proposal included a 35 percent cut from the previous year for agencies that have “alternative funding.” Those agencies were the Board of Education, Cheaha Mental Health Center, the Chamber of Commerce and the Industrial Development Board.
The proposal would give the city a budget surplus of approximately $18,000.
Council members Kenneth Horn, Manuell Smith and Doug Murphree have all expressed their disapproval of a funding cut for the BOE. Horn also said he wanted to see funding restored to the Police and Fire Departments.
“I will not vote for a budget that does not give back to the Fire Department and the Police all the money we took away from them last year,” he said.
Council President James Heigl said a 35 percent budget cut was too much but the BOE “could live with” a $125,000-$150,000 cut. The suggested cut would be more than $320,000.
The meeting had to be moved to the council chambers to accommodate everyone. Discussions went back and forth over where to cut, as members of the audience addressed their concerns to the council.
“All I ask of the council is that when you’re going over this budget, try to look at what you consider to be necessary expenses and what might be luxury or quality of life expenses,” Officer Charlton Kircus said. “If we’re tightening our belts, where does the belt tightening need to be?”
Police Chief Louis Zook also addressed the mayor and the City Council. He said he was unhappy with the direction budget talks had gone.
“We know that these are difficult times, we’re all witnessing it ourselves” he said. “But it is a sad day, in my opinion, for this city government to be in the position it is in. Not because of the economic factors. I have never seen a time where city departments were pitted against one another. That’s what has occurred in this budget process.”
Zook and others brought up a statement made at Monday’s work session. In response to a question from the BOE, Councilman Walter Jacobson said a 5 percent cut across the board would balance the budget. That would include all city departments.
Jacobson reiterated the comment was only a reply to a question and not a proposal.
The budget proposals are for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, which began Oct. 1.
Much of the dispute has come from the $919,000 appropriation to the city schools Board of Education. Wright asked for approval to cut the amount given from the city’s general fund, giving them money from the ad valorem tax fund instead.
That fund, which gains money from a property tax, was designated for school use only. It currently holds around $2.5 million. Another $1.5 million from the fund has been placed into CDs.
Wright’s previous two proposals were a straight-line budget from the previous year and a version with 5 percent cuts to several appropriations.
Both asked for a transfer of more than $700,000 from the ad valorem fund to supplement the BOE appropriation from the general fund.
Murphree said he would rather the city use reserve funds to balance the budget. The city has roughly $1.5 million available for general use. Another $5.4 million has been restricted for specific use or obligated.
That number also included the ad valorem CDs.
“I’ve been here for 13 years,” Murphree said. “We’ve had some good years and some years that weren’t as good. But we’re sitting here talking ourselves into a panic. We’ve got money in the bank. We’re a half-million dollars short on this budget and we’re sitting here scared to death that we’re going to have to start laying people off.”
Wright said he was concerned about spending one-third of their reserve.
“If you take $500,000 out this year and $500,000 out next year, you’re not going to have anything,” he said. “It may be $750,000 next year.”
Under the new proposal, funding for the Parks and Recreation Department and the library would be cut 1 percent. Appropriations facing 10 percent cuts included SAFE, Arc, Talladega County Health Department and the Drug/Violent Crime Task Force.
Wright said cutbacks from departments were deducted before the proposals were presented.
At the Oct. 6 work session, Smith asked the BOE members to come back to the council with a lower dollar amount. The council acknowledged they had not gotten a reply since the meeting.
Zook said he and his department were not given the same chance to speak as others. He also spoke on behalf of other department workers present.
“I wasn’t given the opportunity to give you a figure of what I could live with and what I could live without,” he said. “Most of these people are senior officers. You would have to cut pretty deep to get anybody in this room. But they are concerned about the people that would be affected. They’re here because they care about this Police Department and they care about this city.”
The council’s next work session to discuss the budget is scheduled for Saturday, Oct. 24 at 8 a.m.
You and I may not be as far apart on the overall
woes of city government as might have first appeared. And yes, i have a pretty good view of what items are in the budget. Go by city hall and pick up a copy--it will surprise you just how generous our council is. And, I am of the common opinion that the real problem with city budgeting is one of lack of understanding and overall short sightedness. The traditional approach seems to be that neither the mayor nor council have the cajones to say "no" to anybody
and they generally do not make those agencies or individuals receiving taxpayer funds accountable in terms of where the money is spent or whether we are getting value for our money.
I sometimes find myself not agreeing with much of what Jim Hethcox says (and I think it maybe more how Jim says something than the underlying content of what he says) but his commentary about the need for audit and qualified fiscal management is on target. If the budget process is not fixed, its going to get much worse next year and subsequent years--especially in light of a continuing economic downturn.
In the final analysis it may be irrelevant over whom uses their reserve funds because we all know the folly of depleting funds withheld for emergencies to cover operating expenses. Ultimately, the prudent course requires reduce spending. In order to understand exactly what we are up against a zero based budget process should get everyone on the same page in short order (no pun intended BG).
Furthermore, I have read and followed the comments on this site long enough to understand where most are coming from with respect to the current budget issue. . . also I have listened to comments from council members… I think that the issue that surrounds the problems in resolving the 2009 budget involves more than a deficit in revenue. The council is required to make decisions that demand knowledge of the entire financial picture …past, present and projected future…and that is precisely the point where the scratch itches the most. I do not think that all the members of the council believe that they have been presented the most accurate evidence to date of Sylacauga’s financial position; consequently, I believe that this particular elected body (unlike past city councils) is reluctant to make just any decision … in order to move on (so to speak) … and that is not only understandable; but moreover a responsible course of action.
I suggest an outside forensic audit might be exactly the remedy …. The results of such an examination provides a “time-slice” of our city’s current financial situation and puts the last five years of the regular audit in perspective; but most importantly it would provide insight into and oversight of a process that appears in need of both. Furthermore, you have the benefit of confirming two things 1) the viability of the existing processes and 2) a confirmation of the past financial picture that serves to illustrate a trend line into the future.
y point about Parks and Library is that these are tradional areas of municipal services that most cities provide. I hope we can all agree on that statement and further agree that these are both "qality of life" services that are valuable to our citizens. There are many "non-traditional" funding areas that appear in our budget that in many , if not most, other cities are not funded with tax dollars.
The glory days of unlimited funds are apparently gone. That being said, we must budget so as to provide those services that are in fact city services.
As to my wifes service on the park board, she serves here because she feels it is important work. Rather than just crping about whats wrong in Sylacauga, she is volunteering her time to try to make a difference. If you have issues with her service to parks and rec, take that up with her.
As to a debate with you BG, choose a topic and a venue and lets have at it. But first, and this is the only precondition, you and Kuntryboy are going to have to reveal your true identities--right now you two phantoms are just background noise. Which is it--are you afraid or ashamed.
Order up or shut up!
As usual you should try to use your brain more and your fingers less--that way you wouldn't expose your lack of understanding quite so quickly. Nowhere did I say Sam was doing a good job. What I did say is that in this instance, he proposed the difficult cuts and sent a proposed budget to the council that let them-and the public-know that it is the Council's job to pass the budget--and to make cuts as necessary.
Secondly, although I do not beleive that I know you, am quite sure that I have never run in to you in the library! Just out of curiosity, have you ever read a book? ( remember, comic books don't count )
Thirdly, as to your assanine and inane comments
about the library and the parks and rec department, we as a city are not at the point
fiscally that we have to eliminate either program. And, as to police and fire protection,
under your misdirected theory of city funding
why not just spend the entire budget on these items-quality of life issues be damned.
I just bet you really don't need police protection--you've probably got plenty of fire power and ammo at your house. BG, you scare me-not because of your fascism--but because you are a nut.
actions in the past, but as grandmother used to say, "You've got to give the devil his due". Kudos Sam, you gave the Council exactly what they asked for. It seems only fair that they get an opportunity to step-up and make the hard choices they were elected to make. Budgeting in these hard economic times is necessarily and obviously difficult. Cutting programs with alternate funding only makes sense--and the ones proposed to be cut are not City services anyway.
As to library and parks cuts, these two entities lost 8% of their budgets last year so there may not be room to cut again without severely imparing these programs.
As to the Police and Fire Departments, everyone knows that our safety and property depend on the fine men and women in these departments and cuts in their budgets must be cautious. But, I also know Louis Zook and Tommy Abrams personally and know them both to be good men dedicated to all the best in their public service and know that if budget cuts must be made in their departments, that they will do their absolute best with whatever resources they have to fulfill
their obligations as public servants to keep us safe and secure.
The input of epartment Heads and The Mayor is critical to the budgeting process--but it is ultimately the Councils' duty to pass the budget.
Step-up to your jobs Councilmen, October 1-the deadline for passage of a city budget-has passed and you continue to fiddle as Rome burns.