Image
In the last meeting of the fiscal year, the Saline City Council increased its general fund expenditures by $800,000, water expenditures by about $900,000, and wastewater treatment plant expenditures by $42 million.
What council would not do, however, is increase its general fund contribution to the Rec Center by an additional $70,000.
Councillor Dean Girbach motioned to separate the Rec Center amendments from the others. That motion passed 5-1. (The giant increase in the wastewater treatment plant project will be balanced by lower costs this year.)
Treasurer Sarah Finch said the late budget amendments were out of an "overabundance of caution" in the event that revenues do not meet the city's projections.
"Director (Sunshine) Lambert has done a significant amount of work to lower expenditures," Finsch said. "We've done a lot of work here to accommodate the ongoing equipment and facility needs. Operationally, they are really putting pen to paper to limit spending where they can."
Finch said the budget increase was necessary to ensure the fund would not end the year with a deficit. She noted that if the Rec Center did have a deficit, the Rec Center fund would only take what was needed. For example, if the shortfall was 20,000, it would not take the full $70,000.
City Manager Dan Swallow echoed Finch's comments.
"I think it's critical not to incur a fund deficit," Swallow said. "I think the Rec Center has done a great job at reducing expenses where they can, and I think this is a reasonable approach to go forward."
Councillor Janet Dillon questioned whether some amendments were cost-cutting or whether they were cost-shifting to the general fund. For instance, the Rec Center is saving $60,000 in IT costs. The work continues to be done, but the payment no longer comes from the Rec Center budget.
Finch said she's had questions about the cost under the Rec Center budget.
"Since I've started, I thought the 60, 000 allocation to the Rec fund is pretty substantial for the IT needs they have. So we are really reevaluating the method of cost accounting that we're using," Finch said.
Then Dillon asked the big question.
She noted that the city has padded the Rec Center budget a few times over the years to avoid a corrective plan.
"At what point do we say the system is broken here? I don't want to see them fail, but the city cannot keep constantly bailing them out," Dillon said.
Girbach agreed with Dillon and took issue with the accounting.
"The reason why I took I (separated the Rec Center budget amendment) is, if we're going to do proper cost accounting, changing an IT allocation in the 11th month into a budget year, that's a big question for me," Girbach said. "Doing it at this time for me seems to be very much a concern in terms of how we do our accounting for our city."
Girbach said if it's a major issue, the city should go back and change its fund balances. Finch said these changes would be made in the future.
"The Rec fund obviously has a lot going on, so my job at this point is to make sure that this fund does not have a deficit at the end of the year," Finch said. "I am putting together the best amendments that I can to make sure we have a balanced budget at the end of the year."
Girbach asked if her proposal was meant to avoid a deficit and the resulting corrective action plan.
Finch said such a plan would require a lot of work for her and her staff.
"There is a significant amount of administrative work, as you will recall, with the deficit elimination plan for the sewer fund. It takes quite a bit of work for me and my entire team to take care of that on the back end," Finch said.
Some council members have been dissatisfied with the Rec Center data for at least a decade. Girbach noted that he sees a reduction in membership revenue anticipated this year.
"This will be my fourth ask for membership numbers. The mayor has requested. I have not received that information. It was directed by council. At this point, I'm seeing that as a dereliction of duty," Girbach said. "It's clear that membership numbers are going down. I just want accurate, transparent information, and I am trying to make this clear. I know everyone here is trying to make this Rec Center successful, but why is it so difficult to get the information I am requesting and to present accurate numbers? This just seems like no one wants to deal with the real issue."
Councillor Tramane Halsch said he was huge supporter of the Rec Center. But, he said, it's time for council to understand the issue. He asked council to imagine the city council was dealing with a losing football team.
"How many losing seasons should we tolerate before we start having conversations about the team and about the system?" Halsch said. "There comes a point where we have to say the system is broken. We need the information to determine how it's broken and where it broke down, not to assign blame, but to truly find a path forward."
Councillor Nicole Rice said the city is in a tough spot with the Rec Center. She said the budget amendments were an effort to get the city in a better place. Rice pointed at the unexpected expenditure of the $1.3 million Dectron unit.
"It's a shell game. Let's be honest. I completely agree with my colleagues that this sits on the shoulders of City of Saline taxpayers. But we are not putting the City of Saline taxpayers in a bad position by working hard to figure out how to make this Recreation Center work," Rice said. "This shell game right here, lessons have been learned and we understand how to budget better for next year."
Rice said she understands the concerns raised by Girbach, who worked in accounting.
"But the truth behind it is not that we're trying to steal money from the taxpayers or that we're trying to do something bad," Rice said. "We're switching money from one city service to another city service."
Rice said she hoped council might dial down its comments regarding the rec center.
"I personally would like to dial it down just a little bit for the public to know that we're not doing something nefarious. We're just fixing something we didn't properly anticipate," Rice said.
Girbach made a motion to approve the Rec Center budget amendments with the 11th-hour change in IT allocations. In addition, Girbach asked that council receive membership numbers even if they couldn't be presented before the end of the fiscal year. The motion was seconded by Councillor Jim Dell'Orco.
Council approved the motion by a 4-2 vote, with Girbach, Halsch, Dell'Orco and Jenn Harmount voting yes and Rice and Dillon voting no.
What's causing the deficit concern? Finch said that with eight days to go in the year, membership revenue is down by $22,000.
Dillon said City Council cannot asked to make these decisions so late in the fiscal year.
Interesting that Council at times had no problem removing funding from the Rec Center part way through the year but a reassignment of expenses is troubling? Fair questions but to imply something nefarious is quite inappropriate. Worked adjacent to finance in a Fortune 500 company. Corrections are made when identified. Suspect (hope) there has been some analysis to look at treating Rec Center expenses more aligned with those of other resources. For example, the Senior Center, which is also used by both Saline residents and individuals from the surrounding areas, certainly has facility and other costs. However, many if not most of these costs are not assigned against the Senior Center because they are housed in a school. These costs are absorbed by and buried in the school's budget. So, the Senior Center appears to be very low cost and is not (not to mention the significant investment there in the last few years). In that vein, tell you what, let's treat the Rec Center like the Senior Center and dedicate part of the school to be the new Rec Center, including pools which taxpayers paid for, and see how low the Rec Center costs then go/the profit they turn when they are treated like, for example, the Senior Center. The Rec Center staff has also historically focused on keeping costs low. Just one example, much of their equipment and office furniture is acquired by taking what other City resources are looking to throw away. Finally, Rec Centers are almost never profit centers but they do provide critical services for many as well as improving quality of life AND increasing housing values and community desirability. Does the library turn a profit? No. Do the schools turn a profit? No. Do the parks turn a profit? No. Will Curtis Mansion turn a profit? No. Never had children in the Saline Schools, do not use the library, do not care a whit about the athletic teams, don't think Curtis Mansion should have been funded by the City . . . . and yet here we are paying taxes every year to support all of these things that are of no value to us while the Rec Center, which is a very big part of our lives as it is for many, is constantly under attack by just a few individuals who, rather than seeking solutions, want to continually raise their historical biases against this city asset. Also, I seem to recall the analysis that was performed over the last year or so included not only Rec Center membership numbers but also breakdown of those numbers on various criteria. Girbach was part of the team that participated in that analysis and certainly would have been exposed to those numbers. Time for a change in some Council members who repeatedly malign rather than looking for workable solutions to something that meets the needs of many citizens who are also funding other City resources that have absolutely no meaning to them or positive impact on their lives. For them, the Rec Center seems to be quite the scapegoat while they recklessly increase (mismanage?) spending and pet projects at other City resources.
“Girbach was part of the team that participated in that analysis and certainly would have been exposed to those numbers.”
Exactly! I asked for an update as the reality of those using the center has dropped, requiring further subsidy. What was originally $400k is now $532k. All on the back of the city residents. The majority of users are not from the city proper. The new “5th” task group even stated asking for a millage now was not likely to succeed due to multiple other asks. Call it whatever, bean counting or common sense, it’s evident funding needed to support this operation is far out pacing inflation and revenue generation.
If you've followed council 10 years or more, you know that several members of council have had issues with the way the Rec Center is presented at budget time.
As someone trying to understand what's going on at budget time, you expect certain facts: How is revenue collected? How does this year's total compare to last year's total? How is revenue spent? How does this year's total compare to last year's total?
Countless times, I've seen presentations without any of those numbers. Instead, we hear generic comments.
At budget time, I expect healthy skepticism from council members.
This information is and has been readily available to council.