This morning the Midland, TX, City Council listened to citizens' opinions about city taxes. And there were some very eloquent citizens willing to give voice to their beliefs.
A loosely organized group of concerned citizens was there, including Dawn Tucker, one of the TEA Party organizers, and Jason Moore of Citizens Watchdog. There were others, and all of the speakers were very persuasive.
Jason Moore emphasized that the City Council has left taxpayers confused about the situation. We have a system that gives the Council the power to adjust the rate, but the actual tax is dependent on the appraised property values. Every homeowner would like to see the home value go up, but if it does, it shouldn't mean more money for the tax collectors.
Mr. Moore is no stranger to this type of hearing, and he complimented the Council members for there willingness to communicate. Too often government officials sit silently like angry statues, he said. He took the opportunity to explain that he isn't anti tax. He's anti big government and confiscatory taxes. And he said something few people probably realize, the government entities in Midland are "creeping toward a billion dollars in debt."
Dawn Tucker told the council members that the company for which she works has laid off hundreds of employees, and many of those laid off workers are still out of work. Her point was that it's difficult for citizens living in hard times to appreciate a city government that spends freely while the citizens suffer.
Ms. Tucker asked the council to look at each city departments' expenditures for each quarter and compare the first three with the last quarter. The reason, she said, was because of a common practice among government entities to spend their entire budgeted amount each year so that their budget wouldn't be cut the next year. A big expenditure during the last quarter is the tip off.
Others made similar points. A former government employee told the Council that the typical government department head wants to grow an empire. There's an attitude in government that they can't be cut even when everyone else is having to cut back. Layoffs in government are non-existent, he said.
As to where to start cutting back, one speaker mentioned the public relations staff. He pointed out that we see police officers being interviewed on television about various events, and it seems wasteful to pay a PR person when there are other employees in the various departments who are willing and able to talk in front of a camera and who have done so already.
Mayor Perry said last year's budget was $175 million, and this year's budget is $167. Let's take a look at the files available on the city's Finance & Budget page for comparison.
From the 07-08 budget, page ii:
"The budget presented for all City operations for the 2007-2007 fiscal years totals $150,715,396. This is a 6.43% increase when compared to the fiscal year 2006-2007 budget of $141,616,511." PDF link.
From 08-09 budget, page ii:
"The budget presented for all City operations for the 2008-2009 fiscal year totals $167,374,477. This is a 6.2% increase when compared to the fiscal year 2007-2008 budget of $157,597,643." PDF link.
From the 09-10 budget, page ii:
"The budget presented for all City operations for the 2009-2010 fiscal year totals $166,757,937. This is a 4.39% decrease when compared to the fiscal year 2008-2009 budget of $174,415,485." PDF link.
Is it just me, or does anyone else see a big gap between what each year's budget was supposed to have been when it was proposed and what it was when they refer back to it a year later? I'm no accountant, but it looks like they may have budgeted $167 million for 08-09 but over spent by $7 million to get to the $174 million.
In any event, the $167 million that Mayor Perry referred to for 09-10 looks amazingly close to the $167 million budgeted for 08-09 but which wasn't met.
Finally, news coverage. Councilman Trost asked if there were any news people in the audience at that important meeting. There were. The Council members feel that their meeting are important. The citizens feel that the meetings are important. So here's a question for the Council. Why does the Council have to depend on news people to relay information to the public? The TV cable companies have provided a channel specifically for the city government. Currently they are showing a rerun of an introduction to city government. So why don't they record the meetings and show them on the government channel?
It could be done on the cheap. The city owns cameras, and maybe that PR person could run it. If not, they could seek volunteers to run it like the local churches do for their Sunday morning church-casts.
Anyway, the council meetings on the government channel could be a great resource for the citizens who want to see what our government is doing but can't make it to the council chambers at the appointed times.
Additional readings of the budget will take place at future council meetings, and another public hearing is scheduled on August 11, 2009, at 11:12 a.m. at Midland City Hall. With public participation in government meetings we can help keep Midland on the list of best performing cities.
Another way we can make these meetings accessible is to use live streaming! The watchdogs have been experimenting with a way to live stream a taxing entity meeting. That way we do not have to depend on the taxing entities to get it in the public domain. They can even be posted on youtube!
Great coverage of the events today! Next time I would like to meet you!
Posted by: "Captain Watchdog" Jason Moore | August 04, 2009 at 06:06 PM
Jason, you and the others who spoke at the hearing made a very persuasive case for city belt tightening. And you may have struck a chord with some of the Council members.
Good idea about the live streaming. There really needs to be a way for the citizens to see the hearings and meetings.
See you at the next hearing. Thanks for all you do!
Posted by: Geo | August 05, 2009 at 06:58 AM