The new city budget has been proposed, http://tinyurl.com/2lf5kq . We all have our pet peeves. What would you like to see ripped out of the innards of the city. What gets at your craw. What bites your butt. What makes you so mad that you aren't going to take it anymore? You want to see a straight increase in percentage (I think Carty already told his department heads to chop off six percent)cut out of the buget, and leave it to the department heads, or do you want to get the old blue pencil and start "zeroing" out the items? Northing's more fun (for a geek) than finding the other fellow's "line-item" blunder.
The New Improved Toledo City Budget 2008
updated by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:38:43 pm Comments: 35
Comments ... #
Now maybe it will take. This is the link to Toledo, http://www.ci.toledo.oh.us/, and you'll find the budget there.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:13:43 pm #
I wouldn't mind seeing the swimming pools eliminated. That total was $270,815.94 for the budget. We probably wouldn't save that much, but its a start. Also, get rid of the flowers. I like them, but we probably need other things more. Maybe we could plant cacti (less care, and more evocative of what Toledo is all about right now). "Toledo, the desert of the Midwest".
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:16:38 pm #
It's a screwball URL. What in the hell is that letter 'f' in parens for?
Use http://tinyurl.com to create simple URLs out of long or messy links like the one pointing to Toledo's budget.
Here's a clean URL that points to the City's budget: http://tinyurl.com/2lf5kq
A user can also go to the home page of the City of Toledo Web site to access the PDF file.
I'm hoping Karen Shanahan creates another cool, spreadsheet version of the budget.
oldsendbrdy, I wasn't blaming you for the funky URL. The city employee who created the PDF file could have left out the spaces in the file name and left out that (f). Something like: 2008_Proposed_Operating_Budget_f.pdf would be Web friendlier.
Thanks, JR. Maggie, on Thurber's Thoughts, http://tinyurl.com/2u4xrq, came up with an interesting idea that could get us some federal money: building a women's prison within our own institution. In my comment there you will see I have some discomfort with the idea. But what about becoming a federal holding facility for "illegal immigrants"? Could we get additional money that way.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:35:26 pm #
Here's another URL:
http://toledotalk.com/toledo_2008_proposed_budget_15nov2007.pdf
When the budget proposal is out this early, does that mean another version could come out in December, then January, then February, and so on until the final one that's voted upon in the spring? Or is this the only budget proposal we'll see until the spring vote?
I am hoping this is just a "feather in the breeze". I hope that Carty (in his pique) thought, "I'll give them a budget (referring to the pack of cowards that make up our city's council). Now let's see the b*star*s make something of that. Let them take some crap for a while."
But I am sure the council will be whining about how they didn't get to make input (let's see, the head of a YMCA should really make a good "business" manager), and that they didn't have time to make any choices. You're probably right. We'll be lucky to get a decision out of this group come June, 2008.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:46:46 pm #
jr - just speculating here about additional versions of the budget. But no additional versions are 'required,' so they can wait until they're ready to pass it by the March deadline to make a ton of amendments all on a given day. Of course, that would mean lots of discussions behind the scenes...
OSEbrdy - the idea of a women's prison would only work in a NEW jail...the current one cannot accommodate such or be renovated to do so...
posted by MaggieThurber on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:48:34 pm #
How much are we talking about a "new" jail? And it would probably be amortized (is that the correct term) over maybe a number of years, right, so it might not be as "bad" as it would seem if a figure of $20-$30 was offerred. If we could find some way to get federal dollars for some needed service we could then provide with a larger facility it might well be worth the investment (just like any business would invest in something that would increase future revenue).
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:53:06 pm #
"A million here, a million there (or $20 or $30), and pretty soon you're talking real money"-paraphrasing Everitt Dirkson, Republican Senator from Minnesota.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 09:00:44 pm #
Turns out that Dirksen probably never said the above so I'll take credit for it.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 09:06:56 pm #
OK, so from now until March, the budget will have been combed over with changes suggested. How do we know the status of the budget come January and then February or at any time we choose to be interested in the latest version of the budget?
What version will the budget be on at the end of January? I was thinking that (f) in the file name was version six of the proposed budget. It sounds like the new versions from here on could only be known to the administration.
Are we suppose to track the changes, suggestions, and status ourselves based upon what we read in the newspaper? Thinking in terms of software development, I would think a new "build" of the budget would be released to the public at least weekly, and each new version would have a new file name in case someone wanted to access an older version and maybe compare diffs. Then again, I'm guessing about .001% of the population would have an interest in doing this.
A lot of people now use computers. And the whole reason for putting it on line was to increase confidence in the process. It would make sense (to me) that any changes would be published, and noted. They need to do something that is "wiki", I suppose. I don't really think that is beyond them technically. I am assuming they aren't as "transparent" as we wish they were.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 09:20:17 pm #
I am pretty sure of one thing; the council won't do much, and then blame the administration in the end. We should watch the process closely, and see what individuals are worth a damn. I think we'll find we'll be very disappointed in whom we voted into office. The council wants to be part of the "process" as long as no real work is involved. Otherwise, they'd happily leave it Carty, and put the blame on him in the end.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 09:35:11 pm #
Message from the Mayor :
In 2007, withholding and individual tax collections are not performing at expected levels. However, business tax collections have remained in double digit percentage increases. This is an indication that the business climate is robust. The movement of our Marina Project along with the County’s Arena initiative spur additional economic movement not only in the business section but also in the housing stock.
Our 2008 general fund budget submittal proposes a significant change in the method we use for collection of solid waste. We will begin the process by implementing a pilot program to study automated collection of solid waste with the intent of full implementation within 3 years.From a public safety perspective, we will focus on enhancing vehicular traffic monitoring through increased use of technology and the implementation of monthly air traffic enforcement. We will also work with the Lucas County Commissioners and the Toledo Municipal Court Judges to enhance our criminal justice system by identifying efficiencies in the system and reducing duplication. Our plan also includes the hiring of a police and fire class in the fourth quarter of 2008. Finally, our budget eliminates the need to utilize funds from the capital improvement program to balance our operating budget. This will allow us more funding to invest in the improvement of our infrastructure. Details of the 2008 proposed budget are outlined in the revenue and budget assumptions contained within this document.
Our future financial stability rests with our collective ability to make the tough decisions necessary to provide services to our citizens given the resources available. I look forward to working with City Council as we continue to chart a path of stability.
I read the above. I just wonder how much is "rose colored glasses". Just because we've had "double digit percentage increases" doesn't mean we will continue to have them. If tax collections from individuals aren't performing at expected levels could that mean that while the businesses are doing okay, the owners are plowing everything back into the business, and not allowing themselves to have money to "consume" with?
I hope that the Solid Waste automated collection works out, that could save the city some money. But why not consider contracting out? Is it that we are hampered by a contract?
Monthly air traffice enforcement should quiet those who complain about "red light cameras", and the lack of human enforcement of the laws. Hopefully, nothing major will happen that will hamper the hiring of a police and fire class in the fourth quarter of 2008.
The city is going to have to be more in partnership with the county, and vice versa. The shifting of costs to the county for imprisonment, and legal representation might be a pain in the butt, but if the city doesn't have the funds to mete out justice the criminals might venture out into the "ripe fruit" of the wealthy suburbs.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 10:51:46 pm #
I was looking back through the "thread". We got the administration on the "hook" to provide a balanced budget every November 15th, right? But (according to Maggie) there is no requirement for the council to have additional revisions ready before the March deadline. What a bunch of poo. They can do pretty much what they want, and then pass it. And then place the blame on the administraion. Now I see why they did what they did. They could have easily included a process for "rationalizing" the budget, a process (backed by law) that would have required the council to put their collective noses to the grindstone. Instead, only the administration has any kind of a requirement. Slick politics on the part of whoever drafted the legislation. Not only Carty, but future administrations get the blame. Man, I'd love to be councilman. You don't have to do squat.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 11:24:26 pm #
The 2008 proposed budget expects to collect $707 in the phrenologist account. That's up seven clams compared to 2007.
Revenue Assumptions:
- Income Taxes are assumed to grow at 2.5% in 2008 over an estimated 2.6% growth rate for 2007 over the 2006 actual Income Taxes.
- Property Taxes are estimated at $18.8 million for 2008. This is an increase of about $500K and is consistent with projected final 2007 estimate.
- Estate Taxes are projected at $4.1 million in 2008.
- Local Government Funds are provided for at $17.9 million in 2008. This is consistent with the projected final 2007 amount.
- Interest Income is estimated to yield $3.2 million in 2008. This is based on an anticipated average investable balance consistent with that of 2007 and the effect of somewhat lower interest rates.
- The City has negotiated a new 5-year agreement with Red Flex Corporation to administer the Photo Enforcement Program for the City of Toledo, which would include an increase in the percentage of fine retained by the City of Toledo and an increase in the amount of the fine. It includes an increase in the current number of cameras, which conduct speed enforcement from 7 to 14. On this basis the revenue estimate for this item is being increased from $429K to $2.584 million in 2008.
- The City will increase revenue from traffic enforcement by $312k in 2008. Key to this increase will be the implementation of monthly air traffic monitoring.
- The Tow Lot will net $1,354,000 to the General Fund in 2008 through increases in tow, storage, and salvage fees.
- Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) is reduced to 90% of the budgeted labor cost of DPU for the year 2008.
- Basic Life Support (BLS) is estimated at $1.6 Million per year.
- The Refuse Fee is estimated for a full year at $4.8 million assuming a 90% collection rate.
- Other taxes are assumed to be flat in 2008.
- Emergency Life Support (EMS) is assumed to grow minimally in 2008.
- Remainder of eligible accounts is assumed to increase approximately a net of 1% in 2008.
About the new red-light camera revenue stream from a Nov 8, 2007 Blade story :
"The job of the police department is to do enforcement and reduce accidents," Chief Navarre said. "If we increase revenue while we do that, that is a fortunate byproduct. It is certainly not our objective."
March 14, 2007 Blade story about Toledo City Council voting to steal business from private ambulance owners :
Councilman Joe McNamara said "continuity of care" was the reason he voted for the legislation. The money was not an issue, he said.
Both are lying sacks of shit. Navarre is basically a politician. And whenever a politician tells you that it's not about the money, then that's exactly what it's about. Why else would they have to keep saying that it's not about the money?
How are business taxes up when the 2008 budget for business tax revenue is projected at LESS than 2007? In fact, all three income tax line items are less than 2007...
6030-BUSINESS INCOME TAXES
2004 - 15,447,310.67
2005 - 17,363,554.78
2006 - 19,612,381.43
2007 - 20,585,919.82
2008 - 20,492,499.00
And how in the world is revenue from civil costs projected to double from $1,742,735.80 to $3,914,913.16??? Do you know how many filings Toledo Municipal Court would have to have to double the amount of costs collected?
posted by MaggieThurber on Nov 16, 2007 at 07:30:34 am #
So how do we increase revenue? We could slash taxes, slash services, and see what happens. Toledo might be a really good test case to see if what the conservatives say is really true, or b.s. I don't know if we can do these things legally but it would be interesting. I have heard about contracting out garbage collection. That would probably save a few million (or maybe not).
We could forego the police class, cut the police force to maybe 50, and pass a law that ever one carry a weapon. We could order the police to overlook less serious crimes. We could divest ourselves of Portside, the Marina (I bet that's another Portside in the "wings"), and the Erie Street Market. All kinds of things we could do. The questions are "is it legal", and "how much population are we willing to lose to break even". Are some of the policies of Toledo attracting the poor? An underclass costs money, and they seem to be mostly living in Toledo. Is this because the services are here? And can we get rid of the services, or are these mostly run by the County. If we get rid of the "underclass" don't we also get rid of a lot of the crime that goes with that, the poor showing at schools, and the need for a large (or larger) police force?
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 16, 2007 at 10:37:04 am #
Maggie, wouldn't the collections be less if businesses were closing (even if the rate of taxation was up)? And businesses might close for a number of reasons, not just high taxation. The old "Uncle Sam's" on Broadway has changed hands a half-dozen times after than francise closed, mostly as Mexican restuarants. No one seems to be able to make a go of it. That could be a poor "business model".
The restaurant (I think it was called the "Triangle") across from the rear of the Main Post Office has seen several owners who can't seem to make a business of it. So these businesses close. Maybe if we didn't require any business that grossed less than $100,000 to pay city taxes they could make it. We could support all these businesses with a personal income tax, but we would be helping business.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 16, 2007 at 10:43:21 am #
OSEbrdy - yes, collections could be down due to businesses closing despite an increased tax rate. Laffler Curve comes to mind, as well.
I guess I have a disconnect between Carty's statement saying business in Toledo is good while they're projecting decreased business income taxes...would love to have their finance people explain this for us all.
posted by MaggieThurber on Nov 16, 2007 at 11:00:56 am #
Thanks for the link, fascinating info. Will have fun reading it. Though at 310 pages it's beefy but verbose. :)
It looks as though we'll be able to make "official" comments on the city's blog, http://toledobudget08.blogspot.com/, but it will be moderated (so let's be civil, if not nice).
I will display a little of my ignorance here. I have been thinking that even though the budget has been forwarded on time, we have three new members (D. Michael Collins, District 2; Tom Waniewski, District 5; and Lindsey M. Webb, District 6). I suppose they are "unofficially" trying to get their minds around this while the "lame ducks" may be looking at it, but also realizing they'll have no say in the manner. These new councilman will take office sometime in the new year, correct. If the budget is so important maybe it is time to consider allowing "winners" of our local elections to take office maybe on November 8, or sometime before the new budget is presented. Then they get the benefit of all their "term" being devoted to the budget. Instead, we now have three "lamb ducks" who have less stake in this than their successors do.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 16, 2007 at 07:25:38 pm #
"I guess I have a disconnect between Carty's statement saying business in Toledo is good while they're projecting decreased business income taxes...would love to have their finance people explain this for us all."
Maggie, I think that Carty is just whistling in the dark. I think I might do the same thing in a situation (economics) where "confidence" is as important as substance.
I am a pessimist so I sure wouldn't be the person to be "upbeat" about Toledo's economy. If we lose our last link to the automotive industry (Jeep), and it is decided there is no reason to have Toledo as the center of the legal profession in Lucas County, we would have to make some big adjustments. The only reason we have the population we do is inertia. And since population, business, and the ability to have a variety of "services" are all linked, we could see a much more rapid population decline than we have seen in the past. Whether this is good or bad remains to be seen. But it will be different.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 16, 2007 at 07:57:29 pm #
OSEB - the budget is rarely passed prior to the new year, so the new council members will have a say. I know they all got their own copy...
posted by MaggieThurber on Nov 17, 2007 at 08:21:52 am #
Maggie, I didn't think it would be passed before the new year, but a big deal was made about the fact that it was received with only 20 days to act. These new members can't "legally" take part in discussions, can they? They may look at the paperwork, make small talk, but only after they take office will their comments have any substance. So the rest of the year will be wasted for these three as far as substative discussion of what will happen.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 17, 2007 at 02:31:42 pm #
OSEB - there must be some confusion here. As a result of this past election the mayor has to present a balanced budget for the next year to city council by November 15th each year. Council has until March 31st to pass a balanced budget.
Because the vote hadn't yet been certified, Carty was not required to follow this new provision for this year, but he did - and kudos to him for doing so.
For the 2007 Budget, Council got a budget with a $10 million (or so) deficit in Nov. 2006. They didn't get a balanced budget revision until around March 10, 2007 - that left them only 20 days to review and pass a balanced budget for 2007.
Since the mayor's given them a balanced budget for 2008 already, there are more than 4 months before they have to finalize it. New council members will have plenty of time to review and take part in any discussions and votes on the budget. I really don't expect that Council will vote on the budget yet this year, especially when you consider that they only have 2 more meetings in 2007 and the new council members take office on the 1st of January.
posted by MaggieThurber on Nov 17, 2007 at 04:27:48 pm #
Maggie, I might be causing the confusion. I don't expect the council to vote before the new year, but I do expect them to want to make "changes" in the budget to please their constituents. Unfortunately, the changes they will want to make will put the budget out of balance again. But they'll just play the "blame game" with Carty. Unfortunately, three members won't really be able to participate in the "blame game" until after the New Year.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 17, 2007 at 10:00:30 pm #
ah...yes...I see now...
posted by MaggieThurber on Nov 18, 2007 at 10:44:13 am #
I got a reply to my comment from Councilman Szollosi, http://toledobudget08.blogspot.com/, so if you have comments about the budget you will probably be answered. Be nice.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 19, 2007 at 12:02:39 pm #
This is the link, http://www.ci.toledo.oh.us/Portals/0/2008%20Proposed%20Operating%20Budget(f).pdf. For some reason the link above didn't get all in.
posted by oldsendbrdy on Nov 15, 2007 at 08:12:11 pm #