Council Member Mary Snider announced at last week's Oro Valley Town Council Meeting that "The budget is fine." Apparently, there is nothing in the budget with which she does not agree; except for the "need" to increase the town's contribution to the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce.Her opinion, however, is not shared by all council members. and residents.
Oro Valley Town Manager Caton has, on several occasions, noted the significant time and effort expended in creating the budget. He and his team have used the General Plan and the Strategic Plan as the guide for creating this year's plan. The plan's core themes are:
- Investment in town employees
- Investment in infrastructure and town assets
- Investment in technology
- Economic development as a key strategy to achieve a healthy financial environment
- Support of quality-of-life programs and services for the community
- Revenue enhancements and expenditure reductions.
---
No one doubts the effort nor the intent of the budget. Still, even the most well-prepared budget requires thorough independent inspection on behalf of the residents of Oro Valley.
---
Council Member Snider spent time rebutting Council Member Zinkin on all items on which Zinkin spoke. Apparently, there there is nothing in the budget with which she does not agree.
Council Member Garner recommended considering leasing a police evidence facility as a means of reducing cost, the purchase of hybrid police vehicles to reduce fuel costs, and stated: Garner advocates managing the Oro Valley Police Department in a "...very efficient way."
"All I'm driving for is efficiency" in Oro Valley spending, he noted. "Let's manage. Let's get efficient. Let's look at things that do in this community so that we can be #1."
Council Member Snider also spoke on her survey of take home cars, all of which support the use of take home cars for police officers. For example, she noted, all Sahuarita Officers have take home cars. Previously, she had said that Oro Valley should not be compared to other cities and towns when it comes to public safety issues. Commissioner Garner noted: "I would have no problem with the [Oro Valley} take home policy if Oro Valley would acknowledge that this is a benefit....then compensation would be adjusted accordingly."
Burns recommended that the Chief of Police report to the town manager and not to the council; thus removing discussion of the police budget from the political realm.
Council Member Hornat said he supports the town salary and wage survey only because the town manager thought it should be in the budget. Otherwise, his experience tells him that it will be of no benefit to the town. He supports doing a Naranja plan as long as it focuses on return on investment. "Sometimes you have to spend money because you have it." "I'm not ready to take a chance" on reduced police staffing.
On May 15, it is likely that town council will approve the town manager's recommended budget as submitted. We base this conclusion on the nature and depth of the questions offered by Council Members Hiremath, Snider, Waters and Hornat. It is clear that the are supportive of all spending in the budget. As they are the majority, this budget will pass.
---
6 comments:
Is it possible that Ms. Snider is angling for a well-compensated spot with the chamber, similar to the deal Mr. Loomis is receiving from the RTA?
Budget Justification
What is a “Balanced Budget”?
A balanced budget simply means that the town staff has identified the revenue that is available and matched it to the expenditures that the department managers feel is necessary to continue day to day operations. The primary missing element in balanced budgeting is justification for the expenditures.
Budgets require a cost justification. Budget sponsors such as the Mayor and town council members require a budget (cost) justification where government bodies have a fiduciary responsibility to justify the expenditures of taxpayer revenues.
The justification gives the requesting department manager an opportunity to provide an explanation of budgetary requests that may not be immediately obvious to a reviewer.
Some examples:
The request to replace “aging” computer equipment for $186,000 in the FY2013/2014 budget without an evaluation or study to support the alternatives for the equipment choices falls short of cost justification.
Simply stating that “Public Safety” demands 2.5 police officers per 1000 population without a breakdown of performance objectives and duties to justify the personnel headcount falls short of cost justification.
Mayor Hiremath requested increasing the expenditure to the Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce to $30,000 without any form of cost justification other than “they did a good job”.
Clear and focused explanations help the reviewer understand the need and benefit and allow themselves the opportunity to fulfill their fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayer.
John Musolf
Christopher.....And what would be your basis for asking the question?
Moose......By the same token I would submit that YOUR statements require justification. Just because you type the words does not make it so.
So how about some sources, references, foot notes and other supporting documentation to justify what you are saying.
The three words, "In my opinion" will suffice.
OVOT (a.k.a Don Cox)
Don, again you use your same tiresome approach to respond to factual statements. Since you have nothing factual to contribute, you attack the writer (me) by asking me to justify my statements.
“Moose......By the same token I would submit that YOUR statements require justification. Just because you type the words does not make it so.
So how about some sources, references, foot notes and other supporting documentation to justify what you are saying”.
Don, I have never seen you provide any supporting documentation for any of your comments.
To provide for your education I have included some references I used in my comments:
Balanced Budget:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_budget
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/balanced-budget.asp
http://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/balanced_budget.htm
Fiduciary Duties of Public Official:
http://www.westerncity.com/Western-City/February-2008/Semper-pro-Populus-Fiduciary-Duties-and-Public-Service/
http://www.cityethics.org/content/book-excerpt-1-fiduciary-duty
Budget Cost Justification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-based_budgeting
http://www.gfoa.org/downloads/GFOAZeroBasedBudgeting.pdf
I also used some of my actual 25 years of management consulting experience with budget analysis and justification for many government agencies, non-profit organizations and private industry.
John Musolf
John, John, John......
Ask = inquire,request,solicit
Attack = assult,harass,bother,
assail,hurt, harm
Maybe I am missing something. But I fail to see any relationship between my asking for something and your perception that it was a personal attack. You appear to be as thin skinned as the previous blog master who thought everything was an attack if you disagreed with his perspective.
You want to believe it was an attack, so be it. I don’t. So here comes another “attack”. Hope you survive this one also.
The title of your post was “Cost Justification”. You go on in your little dissertation and mention the word “justification” seven more times. So silly me thinks that you wish to make a point about a lack of “justification” and yet you provided nothing that justified your “factual statements”. Asking for some seemed only fair to me.
You then respond with a series of references upon which you based your post, i.e. your “justification”. Silly me actually looked at your references. You know what I found? In the references you provided for “Balanced Budget” the word “justification” was not used once. In the area you titled “Fiduciary Duties of Public Officials” I could not find any reference to cost justification. In the area you titled Budget Cost Justification, I found the word or term cost justification once in a 25+ page report (I scanned it but did not read every word) prepared by Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), a Canadian group. But in that report I did find out some very interesting information which I’ll share with our audience. You are a great proponent of Zero Based Budgeting (ZBB) and have suggested that it be implemented in the budget process of Oro valley on multiple occasions. In the report you referenced on ZBB there is a section that discusses a survey conducted by GOFA. The results of their survey were displayed and under the title, “Who Uses it”, here is their survey results: Very rare in practice. The GFOA found only 2 governments from a sample of 413.” That computes to .0048%.
So once again I will opine, that your “factual statements” are more opinion than facts.
The preceding response to Mr. Musolf is simply asinine, in my view. Won't waste time 'justifying' that view.
Re: ZBB, maybe the low usage is due to the fact that it actually works in protecting taxpayers from excessive, unnecessary spending and governing out-of-control bureaucracies into respecting the citizenry instead of being purely self-focused (as effective town councils are wont to do?)
Conjecture, so doesn't require support....
Post a Comment