Toward the end of the comments section of our Thursday post, we suggested the first quarter revenue reports for this fiscal year should not be a cause for financial management panic.
Which begs the question -- when do we think we may be inclined to panic?
Short answer -- by the end of the third week in December.
Eight months of the City's fiscal year will have elapsed by that point in time. The shopping season will have been well underway and coming to a close. Some new businesses will be open and operating, possibly providing that hoped-for uptick in local sales taxes. The second installment property tax bills should have been sent out by the shitsqueaks working in Crook County by then. And we will have eight months worth of expenses and revenues to look at, and the ability to gauge the City's financial picture much better.
If expenses have risen sharply and revenues have taken a corresponding dive, then we are going to panic.
We will also be frantically paging through the City budget to see what if any expenses can be eliminated in the fourth and final quarter of the fiscal year so as to avoid another abysmal year of big budget deficits.
You may recognize our panic because we will be the people who've pulled Christmas stockings down over our faces while mainlining some liquid holiday cheer.
August 30, 2010
When IS It Time To Panic?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
48 comments:
LOL. Shop local!
Interesting next week it's Labor Day and no meeting tonight.
I would think they'd have one tonight because of that.
Pru, kudos for your honesty. I think it could be cutting it close to wait till theres only 4 month left in the budget yr. Not sure Im down with that.
Panic is how the hopelessly unprepared confront impending failure. Another brilliant idea, PRU.
Anon@3:02 --
Sarcasm noted.
We so enjoy your incisive witlessness -- er -- wit.
3:02,
You are being to hard on Schmidt.
He is always prepared to peddle panic.
Anon 3:02,
I think recommending panic here is hyperbole. You might want to look that big word up.
3:51: I agree. I think the PRU was using hyperbole.
I also agree with the person upthread who said waiting too long could be cutting it too close, but I don't think doing nothing until then was suggested. The budget figures will be reported each month if I understand that right. The Mayor and the Aldermen should be on top of this the whole way.
I wonder who had the brilliant idea to use the Comptroller's State-wide report as a launching pad for Mayor DipSchmidt's fiscal worries concerning Park Ridge...
...I still get a chuckle out of Mayor DipSchmidt's budget email...but I did notice he did a wee bit of back pedaling...as opposed to panic pedaling...about the 1st qtr. reports in the press this past week.
...ah, what a difference a few weeks and some accurate financial reports can make, eh DipSchmidt? Like you said, Mayor DipSchmidt..."it's too early to tell..."
Bean:
The panic pedaling or peddling, take your pick, was so he could alarm everyone into believing if we don't cut off all funding to all community groups the city will go bankrupt!!!! The only problem with that is cutting off the contributions won't put a dent in what he said he thinks the hole in the budget is going to be!!!!
Looks to me he thought he could get more value from playing political games then anything else.
6:16:
You hit on exactly what has bothered me the most about this whole deal. Of all the things in the budget, what does he hammer on the most?? What does the blog in his corner hammer on CONSTANTLY??? Community groups!! If he/they really believe all that he stated about the budget, why are they not hammering ALL areas equally??? As you correctly state, the thing they continue to beat the hell out of does not come close to solving the issue the claim we have. He then tap dances by not offering any specificity about other cuts and says it is up to the council. As you correctly state, again, political ganes.
6:16 and 7:10
Now that the waste of $165,000 for fighting O'Hare looks like it might be dead, what $190,000 would you cut instead of the community groups?
Anon@7:20 --
Why stop at $190K? If as the Mayor and some people have insisted, the City budget is already unbalanced and in jeopardy of being as much as $2million in the red, what would be your suggestions for further cuts?
We would also like to hear from Anon@3:02 -- any brilliant ideas for cutting the budget beyond the amount budgeted for community group contributions?
Incidentally, in case you both missed it -- a number of possibilities for cuts have been offered by us and commenters to this blog.
We stand firm in our earliest suggestion that the Mayor should have line item vetoed spending in the original budget he instead chose to toss back onto the backs of the Aldermen and City Manager.
We stand firm in our suggestion that contributions beyond those serving human needs are cut worthy -- by our count, those cuts will amount to roughly $117K for the coming year.
If the Council does vote to leave in place cuts to non-human needs groups, will you and Anon@3:02 suggest the Mayor follow his own musings about rehiring at least one of our laid off police officers or some other of our laid off City workers?
At this moment in time...I could be persuaded to ADD one or two more staff bodies to the unemployment lines...
...but I'm just a big meanie!
BWAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAA
Pru, I think you scared off 7:20 and 3:02. Silly people with nothing to offer.
The irony of your post here is inescapable. However did you get so smart?
And to 6:16pm... if you are paying attention you know that the $190k and community groups and the $165k for ORD are cuts that the Mayor and others are talking about AFTER the original budget was whacked and AFTER several positions were cut. You make out as if we have a balanced budget, excess cash and that the future financial and economic conditions are all A-OK.
You are either dishonest, stupid or both.
Loyal PRU followers make out as if the other blog is in the tank for the Mayor. You all look in the mirror lately?
Anon@9:55 --
Perhaps specifics and details are lost on you. We understand there are those who prefer shallow thought and consideration of issues.
As for our faithful PRU readers -- they seem to recognize the smell of sizzling steak when they get a whiff of it.
We do find the other blog's post for today to be another entertaining trip down the slippery slope of political expediency and spin.
Perhaps some water boy messenger will suggest some local shrewd fella bid on the management of the Taste of Chicago, since that opportunity was not made available by a local Chinaman.
9:55:
To use your words, the mayor said even AFTER the budget was whacked the budget was still under water by more than a million. But all he or the other blog keeps harping on is community groups, community groups, community groups!! The money for the airport group and the community groups doesn't come close to whacking what he said needs to be cut!! Also the mayor did not say anyting about the fireworks and if the city should be spending that money, why?? He doesn't seem to have a problem whacking charities!! He doesn't seem to have a problem wanting veterans to pay for a parade!! He doesn't seem to have a problem wanting to bill Analise's Run for raising money for Make A Wish grants!! And the other blog did not touch the fireworks either, why?? Were they too busy hammering the volunteers they don't like instead??
Anon: August 30, 2010 7:20 PM
Why is it always either or with you simpletons. Maybe not all, but some of the "community groups" are essential and necessary parts of any community.
9:55 AM,
I read Prus post as recognizing things could go south and we have to pay attention or there could come a time when panic might be what happens.
You sound stressed out about criticism of the other blog and the mayor. The mayor gets kudos too for trying to keep a lid on things. He didnt do that when he was an alderman but he is trying to make amends I suppose.
Anonymous @ 11:11,
Mayor DipSchmidt finally has recognized the importance of spending controls...woohoo
Unfortunately, Mayor DipSchmidt is getting and taking financial management advice from some characters of questionable ability...
It's "simple" to say "no" to everything without making any value judgements about what it is you're saying "no" to...or without consideration of how deep-sixing the funding for a program can cost you in other ways....
...and that same "simple" mind can then listen to the acting Fin. Dir.'s report (there's a reason the city mgr. is STILL taking applications to fill that position) and "shout out" how refreshing it is to hear "candor" without recognizing the erroneous math which lead to the "simpleton" conclusions in the report.
...but hey...enough about specifics to Park Ridge...what does the State Comptroller have to say...?
...:::snork:::...
Something I don't understand about all this is it's not like this is the first year the town is looking at a possible deficit. The town has been having deficits for years in a row now. In my memory this is the first year the town made significant cuts to personnel and programs.
So why all the crying now? Is it because now there isn't enough coming in to cover up the over spending?
I'm not saying we should be cavalier about the budget or anything. I'm just saying it strikes me as strange that all of a sudden there are people crying so loudly about it and a very few minor parts of it.
Because Anon 12:08 it's not about the minor dollars in question or balancing the budget. It is because a small number of the Mayor's think-tank does not want government spending money on anything other police, fire and other basic services and the unbalanced budget is their vehicle to get there.
Anon 1:13 I appreciate your view but it still strikes me as strange since this seems like the worst possible time to want to stop giving money to charities if we don't have to. There are many people in need because of the economy right now.
It's not as if our taxes will go down if we cut these funds. The small amount it costs us as individuals added all together goes a long way to help others who are struggling. I can't understand how this has become such a big issue now when it was never a big issue before when the town had deficits.
Was Taste of Park Ridge ever intended to be a money maker? If so, to whose benefit? And if not, and they are making money, then where should the money go? Local charities seem like they'd be logical beneficiaries.
And, since TOPR has supposedly made significant money the last couple of years, perhaps they should lower ticket prices and make it a break even event, maybe then all the flap would stop.
Hey PRU,
I think Pubdog has a crush on you.
Anon@4:08 --
So we see.
Again, it wasn't either PRU.ADMIN or any other member of the Crew who has criticized the Pub-dog's friend.
However, we do note the Pub-dog's continuation in defending the owner of a company doing business with the City but still rated D- by the BBB, though that recent upgrade from an F rating is a modest improvement.
We also note the Pub-dog's failure to fully vet the issue of the fireworks donation and engage in total transparency about the nature of that donation to the extended family of that friend, while choosing to wax poetic about that friend's giving back to the community. And now we know the give back would not have taken place if the Pub-dog's friend weren't ultimately making that donation to his extended family.
We further note the Pub-dog's failure to fully vet the issue of what that friend's company gave back to the community as opposed to the claims made by that friend about what was received from the community and what those actual totals were, and how those contracts were bifurcated -- keeping both under the amount which may have triggered the necessity of bidding the contract out.
And our PRU.Tech laughs every time somebody repeats the misleading tale offered by the Pub-dog's friend about involvement with the White House website, which Pub-dog allowed to be posted without clarification, though knowing the impression left with readers would be decidedly false and inflated.
Using the Public Watchdog blog as a means to purvey false impressions seems to be habit forming.
Yowch!
LoL. Anything can be bought!
August 31, 2010 2:40 PM
To answer your question, the Taste was not intended to be a money maker for the city or the organization running it. The restaurant venders were supposed to make money and they do from what I can see. If the ticket costs were lowered I'm not sure breaking even is what the restaurant venders are interested in doing for three days of hard work.
It used to be run by the Chamber which I think always lost money on it even though the city budgeted money for them to run it every year. But after the late great Harry O'Brien lost more money I think by trying to hire people to run it, the Chamber decided soon after to drop out of the position of running it.
It was Howard Frimark's idea to get a group of people together to volunteer to run it. The idea was the city would give seed money and the event would become self supporting.
It looks like the group has done a good job of building the event and they can be self supporting now. But I don't know how much it takes to front money for deposts and things to prepare for the event.
Your idea about giving money to local charities isn't a bad idea. But I don't know if the profit they report is enough to cover both the out front costs for the event and the charities.
Eureka!!! If we cut all the community groups even the charities, cut the OHare group, and took every penny from the Taste then all the City's financial troubles would be over!!!
Anonymous @ 5:37,
Sure...and then in order to have a Taste of Park Ridge every year, the clowncil could again provide $23,000 in seed money *each year*...in addition to the $11,000 out of pocket it costs for police, fire, and public works employees...
...or better yet, have the city staff dedicate their time to organizing and running the event...or over-seeing some committee, and have city employees and official city committee members (appointed...?...by...?) put the squeeze on local businesses and organizations for sponsorships...yeah, you want your city staff and official committee members engaging in those activities...
...and then surely all our financial troubles would be over!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAAAA!
I think it's all sort of, well, sad. I mean at first the questions about how the Taste is bieng run were interesting. Asking for the tax returns was a good question and I agree with wanting transparency. However, now the tax returns are public so how dead does that horse have to be?
Silence Dogood:
I think you may be onto something.
Why else ignore other unessential spending when talking about how bad the budget is.
It makes no sense otherwise.
Forget about the budget... you all just don't get it. Here's a questions for you though: why can't these community groups, with their paid executive directors and/or numerous members hailing from Park Ridge and/or will all of their apparent community support go out and raise their own damn money and get the hell out of the public's pocket via their money grubbing from the city? I have lived in Park Ridge for nearly 20 years and I have never been solicited by Center of Concern, Rainbow Hospice, the Teen Center or really any of them as far as I can recall.
It's hard raising money, no doubt... I guess it's easier making friends with a few aldermen and then getting your money from them, huh?
Exhibit A:
Anon: 6:10 AM
"and get the hell out of the public's pocket via their money grubbing from the city?"
As I said, with these people it is not about a balanced budget.
September 1, 2010 6:10 AM,
The budget is the reason Schmidt and others have been whining that no groups should get any money for any reason.
Clearly you have never done any real charity work for fundraising, otherwise you would know the time and money it takes to raise money.
The human needs service groups in town spend most of their time and money on providing services to those in need instead of on fundraising.
Almost all of the money human needs service groups get are grants with restrictions for how the money can be used. They can't spend the money on fundraising.
Oh and by the way, it took me awhile but I do learn. And what have learned is that you are always better off supporting a cause and those who support a cause than “making friends” with elected officials. More than once I have supported and befriended elected officials and then seen them turn tail and run. Always support the cause.
6:10:
".......and raise their own damn money and get the hell out of the public's pocket via their money grubbing from the city?"
Are you, the other blog, and the Mayor saying that ANY program that might help those out of the mainstream and/or those who need help must survive based on it's own fund raising or take a bullet in the head??
Silence Dogood at 8:16... wrongo, it is all about a balanced budget and we don't have one.
Anonymous at 8:29... wrongo, I have done charity work and fundraising and I have sat on the board of an NFP for more than 10 years. You think I didn't know about charity work and fundraising because I disagree with you? Like I said, it's hard work: I guess we will disagree about what an Executive Director ought to be doing. Regardless, when you hang out your NFP shingle I don't think the first place you ought to be going is to the government for money, unless that is all pre-arranged. Is that the case with CofC or Rainbow or the Teen Center? If it is I will stand corrected.
And I didn't say they should spend grant money on fundraising... that's a red herring if I ever heard one.
And finally, Anonymous at 8:44...
I don’t claim to speak for anyone but myself. Did I say that "ANY program that might help those out of the mainstream and/or those who need help must survive based on it's own fund raising or take a bullet in the head??" No, I did not, so don't put words in my mouth.
I think I was pretty clear. I wonder why these groups can't raise enough money to be self sufficient, especially if they have the backing of those like so many here who apparently feel their mission is so important. Maybe it is, and if it is and you feel so strongly about it give them YOUR money.
Additionally, I wonder why 4 or 5 or 7 Aldermopes get to decide how to spend taxpayer money on these private enterprises. Under exactly what authority can they do this?
And before you go off about fireworks, TOPR or some other distractions... I say cancel them all... Park Ridge won't fall apart if a party is canceled. How about we get the city's finances in order, and yes Dogood, and provide the essential services that a city is supposed to provide to its residents?
12:44
Exaclty what essential services are not provided? I haven't heard of a house on fire without the response of the Fire Department, or any illegal activity that wasn't addressed by the police. The water comes when I turn on the faucet. The streets are paved and clean. The garbage is picked up every week.
Many charities get government grants. The Feds, the State, the County, the Township and municipalities all over the country contribute to charities that provide for the common good. We gave all 7 aldermen the authority to make these decisions when they were elected.
Cna they do a better job of balancing the budget? Yep.
Should they better vet the charities to ensure that they are doing good deeds for the citizenry of Park Ridge in and efficient way? Yep.
Should they require financial reports from these entities as well as TOPR and other private events? Sure.
Will eliminating these expenses get us anywhere near the supposed $2 million shortfall projected by the mayor? Nope.
Is there a better way to discuss the merits of all these arguments and actually come to a solution that includes real cuts to spending and continuing to leverage the volunteer help in this town? You bet.
September 1, 2010 12:44 PM,
I am skeptical of what you say is your experience. I think you don't understand the first thing about real charities and fundraising or grant restrictions.
I think people like you are thick headed and refuse to understand and so I am not going to bother to argue with you. I am just happy I don't live in your world.
12:44:
I want to make sure I understand what you are saying.
You say "it is all about a balanced budget and we don't have one".
If your opinion was the budget was balanced would you support these contributions?
September 1, 2010 2:23 PM
Exactly what essential services do the community groups provide for our residents that corresponds to the money they are getting?
You say the council can do a better job of balancing the budget, should better vet the charities, and should require financial reports them and TOPR. But it doesn't.
Cutting the charities and the O'Hare money will get us $355,000 (17.75%) closer to the $2 million shortfall projected by the mayor then doing nothing.
GFL with your nothing.
Anon@5:38 --
We have afforded you all the patience we have to give, especially in light of how you choose to conduct yourself.
However, you have now exhausted that patience.
This will be the last comment from you, particularly a question, we will publish until you answer the questions that have been posed to you and others of your ilk.
Aside from O'Hare and the Community Groups, what cuts do you and the Mayor propose should be made -- to not just get us closer to the $2 million shortfall projected by the mayor, but to actually and completely close the gap you and the Mayor insist exist in the budget.
By Anonymous September 1, 2010 5:38 PM:
"Exactly what essential services do the community groups provide for our residents that corresponds to the money they are getting"?
My guess is you lump all the community groups together because you don't want to talk about cultural arts separate from human needs.
I want to talk about them separately. I want to specifically talk about the Center of Concern and the essential services they provide to this community.
The city of Park Ridge is donating $55,000 dollars to the Center this year.
What the city of Park Ridge will get for that donation is 1,350 friendly visits to frail elderly and the disabled right here in Park Ridge.
What the city of Park Ridge will get for that donation is 326 seniors and their families will receive ongoing counseling and case management right here in Park Ridge.
What the city of Park Ridge will get for that donation is 3,500 reassurance calls to frail elderly and the disabled right here in Park Ridge.
What the city of Park Ridge will get for that donation is legal, financial and medicaid counseling for 260 residents right here in Park Ridge.
What makes anybody think these services are essential? Just ask the people who receive them where they would be without the Center's assistance.
What else could make anybody think these are essential services? How about the fact that the Park Ridge Police have a program that also provides senior wellness checks. The city of Park Ridge seems to think these human needs services are essential. The police department seems to think these human needs services are essential.
Maybe everybody would prefer the police to spend their days making wellness checks and calls to the homes of frail elderly and the disabled here in Park Ridge instead of being out on the streets for patrol. How much does one police officer cost the city of Park Ridge per year? I think I heard the number $100,000 mentioned some place.
We did get rid of four of our officers recently though.
The Center provides all of the above essential services at half the cost of one police officer.
Get over yourself Anonymous September 1, 2010 5:38 PM
6:10am here from yesterday... and I think maybe you have me confused with the 5:38pm poster. Be that as it may, you asked: if the budget was balanced would I support the community group contributions?
I would draw a parallel in this situation to the PADS situation from not so long ago. I was not in favor of PADS. But I said from the beginning, or as soon as it was apparent that a PADS shelter could be allowed by virtue of city zoning and ordinances, if someone wanted to come into Park Ridge and operate a shelter and follow the zoning and ordinances in place have at it. I still might not like it but I could live with it.
Similarly, I believe we have a policy here in Park Ridge: City Contributions to Private Non-Governmental Organizations; I have taken the liberty of cutting and pasting it below. If the Aldermen want to give taxpayer money to private organizations and they follow this policy statement the, just like the PADS deal, I still may not like it but I will have no room to complain. One of my beefs as it is is that the aldermen think can give what they want to who they want without any boundaries; in that case why stop at $190k? Why stop with the current crop of handouts? Why have any limits at all?
I understand that what's been going on has been so for a long time but that doesn't make it right.
Follow the policy, have a rigorous and honest discussion about each and every contribution and then if the idea of making some or all of the contributions passes muster I may not like it but I can live with it.
****************
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Policy No. 6
General Subject: General
Specific Subject: City Contributions to Private Non-Governmental Organizations
Date Approved: December 2, 1974
Date Revised: February 18, 1991
PURPOSE
To establish a policy regulating the use of City funds for the support of private non-governmental
organizations.
RATIONALE
The City recognizes and commends the high aims, labors and community benefits that are provided by the
many private non-governmental service organizations. Although the City endorses the concept that public
funds should not be used to support any private-non-governmental organization, in limited circumstances
the City may provide financial support to a private non-governmental organization when such organization
provides a service that is deemed to be of substantial benefit to the community.
POLICY STATEMENT
1. In general, public funds should not be used to support any private non-governmental organization.
2. Upon request, public funds may be authorized annually to support non-governmental Not-for-profit
organizations that provide a service that is determined to be of substantial benefit to the community
and that is not in conflict with or duplicative of services provided by any other governmental body
having jurisdiction within the City.
3. When considering use of limited public funds for private non-governmental organizations the City
shall consider:
A. The community need for offered services(s)
B. The community benefit for such service(s)
C. Private financial support for the service(s)
D. Community volunteer support for the service(s)
4. Organizations, which solicit and receive City financial support, shall be required to submit
financial reports clearly identifying the organization’s income and expenditures.
CPS6 1 OF 1
".........just like the PADS deal, I still may not like it but I will have no room to complain".
There is the answer to the question that was posed.
Even if the budget was balanced (even if we had a huge surplus) he would not support these contributions. He would only grudgingly go along with it becuase he had no choice. If there was something he could do about it he probably would.
Post a Comment