Better late than never don't work anymore

The number one thing that irritates me the most about the DOR report issued in November, 2012 is what is it the report. Its the never ending, seemingly constant cherry picking that continues to go on by some to support a determined goal.

If your main argument to support your position is the DOR report, than at least do everyone the courtesy of following the DOR report to obtain your goal.  Stop trying to shove something down our throats that you yourself aren't following.

Saying this, I want everyone to know that everything contained in the DOR report needs to be properly addressed. 

The other thing I want everyone to know is today's piece has absolutely nothing to do with the Town Administrator position or abolishing the BPW.  NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SAME.

As a matter of fact, if you want to review the report for reference, skip recommendations 1 through 4 for today completely.

I highlight today the budget process.  I have blogged on it previously, I will blog on it again. Today's blog is driven by a process in existence that contains now of the recommended components, but is being driven by the recommended goal.

From the DOR Report, Recommendation 9, starting on page 14:

We recommend that the town modify its budget process and adopt budget policies that contain the following components:

Early start – The budget process should begin early in the fall with a budget calendar agreed to by the town administrator, the selectmen and the finance committee. In the next step, revenue projections are developed by the town administrator. We expect that to arrive at estimates, the town administrator would work with the accountant and other financial management team members and department heads whose offices generate revenue. The finance committee chair should also be involved in the process. 

Consensus – We recommend that the town administrator present revenue and fix cost projections such as health care coverage, pension obligations, and debt service to a joint meeting of the selectmen, finance committee and school committee. To facilitate long-term thinking, a multi-year forecast should be produced. A consensus accepting the projections should be recorded. If possible, agreement should be reached on how future increases in revenue projections will be divided, especially between the town and school department. Budget guidelines should emerge from this process and be circulated to department heads with a request for appropriation needs. As adjustments occur to state aid, if any, the town administrator should communicate and confirm to the selectmen and finance committee the previous consensus on the allocation of the additional revenue. 

Linear Process – Once department requests are received, a linear budget process should follow. Typically, the town administrator would meet with department heads to review requests and would then develop an omnibus budget for presentation to the selectmen. The selectmen would review, with the town administrator, his budget recommendation. If desired, they would meet with managers of major town departments only. Subject to any changes, the selectmen would approve the town budget and forward it to the finance committee. Once the finance committee completes its budget hearings with department heads and review of other warrant articles impacting town finances, and incorporates its changes, if any, the budget would be made ready for town meeting. 

Communication – Necessary to the process is a high level of communication between and among local officials. Joint meetings serve this purpose. The exchange of information should be on-going among the town administrator, selectmen, finance committee and the town’s financial officers, particularly as they get deeper into the process. In this way, town leaders can present a unified budget position at town meeting which will go far to build public confidence in the process and the persons involved. 

Routine Monitoring – To ensure that the adopted budget is kept on track, the accountant should distribute monthly expenditure reports and periodic revenue reports. With this information, the town administrator will be able to monitor revenues and expenditures to make sure the budget is on target, or to prepare corrective action if it is not. If problems appear, the town administrator should inform the selectmen and finance committee chair.

The bold text has been added to highlight some of the points that are essential to essentially a necessary procedure.  You don't need a town administrator to implement this process.  You can substitute the current executive secretary position for it.  It could be implemented. It could have been implemented for this year.  It could have been implemented prior to the report.  

Even with the nowhere near close to early start we take to budgeting, if the consensus, linear process and communication components would utilized, we would be seeing another year with March coming and going and no one knowing what the heck anyone else is doing.

Want the best example of total lack of communication, read the article in the Fairhaven Neighborhood News relative to budget discussions.  Keep in mind that the Selectmen met with the school department, and the other "big budgets" back in what, late January. Now tell me where during that January meeting the issues with the budgets raised this past Tuesday were addressed with those departments, particularly the schools.

There have been a whole lot of numbers that haven't added up over the years folks, numbers coming from those submitting their own numbers.  Numbers from those responsible for their numbers.  

Every year we have numbers that don't add up. Not to mention the numbers every year we don't hear about.

Some one made a comment to me you can only make the DOR budget policy worth with a Strong TA.  Pure bunk.  

Neither do you need state aid figures to start the process.  Not knowing what you are going to get from the state is not an excuse for not putting together a needs based budget.  Not a want, not a Christmas list, not an expanded budget. A needs based budget.

There is nothing hard about the concept of preliminary budgeting, subject to funding available.  It isn't a unique concept.  

Neither is what goes on in this town year in and year out.  There is no rhyme or reason to the constant changes that ebb and flow every year.  

Early start folks.  It isn't a difficult concept.  It shouldn't be a difficult thing to do.  there are certain numbers that are in fact known early.  There are certain reasonable assumptions that can in fact be made early. there are certain consensus issues that need to be resolved early.

You can't build a consensus throwing out a figure in January and than change it in February based on essentially smoke and mirrors.  You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that something isn't going to fly based on information presented in February that existed when you made your January presentation.

It doesn't take an Einstein to look at the "new" calculations to figure out what is being shifted and why in the relative theory of the yearly budget.

Point blank.  Take any scenario you want, assume present level of expenditures with present level of revenue factoring in the Prop 2 1/2 scenario, project it out for 5 years, using a steady % for increase in expenditures we are in the hole, or in the parlance we are use to we are going to hit a brick wall.

Nothing novel or insightful.  Neither is a policy to build up a surplus to use down the road to offset operations.  Doesn't solve the underlying problem.  Doesn't address the  fact that is exactly what is being recommended we not do.  

Wrap you heads around this one, because if you figure it out let me know. I sure as heck can't.  Cut police, fire and highway salaries overtime.  Okay, I can go along with that if you are doing so based on the premise that the police, fire and highway overtime is being abused.  If you make the cut with the understanding that this is what you get, work with it.  

Would there be extenuating circumstances that might give rise to adding to that OT during the course of a year.  Sure.  Declared emergencies.  A catastrophic event. but hand in hand with that wouldn't you expect some trimming on use otherwise?  

Unless you change the policy on overtime, how does cutting a budget for O.T. work if everytime the OT budget gets blown out of whack you supplement it?  Such a policy only works hand in hand with a determination that regular staffing levels have to be reduced so as not to exceed the overtime budget, i.e. you do not fill every vacant shift position.

If you allow every vacant shift position to be filled unless you can show the OT is being abused, how does reducing the funding for OT in May do you any good if you are only going to give the money back during the year?

Once again we are hearing about the schools circuit breaker account.  I have an absolutely simple solution to the continuing debate about the schools maintaining the circuit breaker account.

If you don't know what this account is for by the way, the real simple digest version is it is a special needs reserve fund.

It is an amount allowed to be retained by the school department from the circuit breaker funding received from the state in year one to be used in the following year for non-budgeted special needs assessments. The amount in the account can never exceed the amount received in the prior year.

You do not need to maintain a reserve.  Let's be clear on that.  Just as a number of other departments do not need to maintain certain reserves, gift accounts, balances in funds reserved for appropriations, etc.  This one often gets pointed too because, that the school budget, it often has a bunch of zeros in it.

If the concept of maintaining a healthy reserve for unexpected things is good for the general fund, why not here.  Make no mistake about this point, determining special needs for a future year is not something anyone can do with precision. You can estimate, you can guess, but you cannot know.

I am not going to go into a long dissertation.  You want the schools to wipe out that reserve no problem.  If you do so, are you going to be prepared to appropriate extra money during the year for special needs that come up during the year, that are otherwise paid for from the reserve?

Do not get me wrong.  In a push come to shove year, I would have no problem looking at that reserve.  I have a big problem looking at a reserve to build up a reserve.

To discuss the circuit breaker account without discussing what it is for, how it is built and what it can be used for is during a budget discussion, in my opinion a tad misleading. To discuss your concerns with a departments budget, to snip at it, to question it after meeting with the department without doing the same, and apparently with no intention to bring them back to do the same, is what? You tell me.  I know what it is. I think you do too.

You will never, ever build consensus or communications doing the same things year after year.  

You certainly aren't ever going to get answers to your questions without asking them.  The intent isn't getting the answer though is it.

I have to end it hear.  I ask you to think about that budget recommended process.  Think long and hard. than ask yourself does it make sense.  Than ask why can't it be done.  Than ask why it hasn't be done. 

The answer year in and year out has been can't do it, can't do it, can't do it. you absolutely can't do it if you absolutely don't want it done that way.

I know I said today had nothing to do with the TA article.  However no TA will ever be successful in this Town, or any community, if he or she cannot master the consensus and communication component of that budget process, and fails to apply the linear review.  

Enough for today.

Be safe.