Saturday, December 17, 2005

Overseer finds error in budget that favors city

Okay gang, here is an idea I floated a while ago. It might be time to revisit it as there are many cries for an accounting of the expenses of the two overloard bodies that are working in Pittsburgh. We don't know how much these oversight groups are costing.

But more to the heart of the matter, not that the money isn't important, comes my suggestion. My point goes to a working pressure point. News:
Overseer finds error in budget that favors city Council must pass a budget by year's end, and is scheduled to take a final vote on Monday. If the state-appointed Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority doesn't approve it, state funds may be withheld and the authority could intercept new tax revenue next year.

The authority and Act 47 team are working together in talks with council.
These overlords might be earning their keep if they find $2-million-plus errors in the budget. That's great.

However, the overlords need to make themselves players. So, they must deny approval of the budget for as long as possible. And, they must create an uncertainty about what the plan is really about. If the overlords are fuzzy with the plan, then the overlords get to have decisions as they come as the wind blows. That puts power into the realm of the overlords and away from the city's elected politicians.

So, here is the plan. While the overloards are in town, everyone's pay is cut in half. Don't pay the mayor nor council members (elected folks) their full salary. Pay them half. And half is generous, IMHO.

Also, don't pay the overloards their full salary.

The unpaid money goes into escrow. Half of the unpaid money gets paid upon the departure of the overlords. The other half of unpaid salary gets paid three or four or five years after the departure of the overlords, provided that the city's finances are still afloat.

This would give an incentive to the overlords for leaving. That is real motivation.

This plan would also give incentive to the overloards and elected people to find a real solution.

We don't have much leverage now. We don't have a 'sunset' of these overlords. They stay and they get paid. And, we don't even know how much.

I want to pay them when the work is done and when the solutions are proven to work.

I will be happy to take this challenge as long as others in the overloard caucus do the same. And, I would be happy to use self-lobby efforts to make these concepts part of state law, for all present and future overlords throughout the state.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Overseer finds error in budget that favors city
Income projections $2.5 million short

Saturday, December 17, 2005
By Rich Lord, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pittsburgh's fiscal overseers said yesterday that they've identified a $2.5 million error that could provide some breathing room in the city's budget.

The city annually receives that amount from the Sports & Exhibition Authority, which it uses to pay off old stadium-related debt, said Act 47 team co-leader James Roberts. The cost side of that pass-through was counted in Mayor Tom Murphy's proposed 2006 budget, but not the income side, he said.

Mr. Roberts submitted proposed changes to the budget that would add that amount, but also subtract $555,000 in new costs. In all, the changes could allow Pittsburgh City Council to pass a budget that calls for a modest $2 million year-end balance.

The subtractions include $405,000 from an agreement with the laborer's union that wasn't included in the budget. Another $150,000 in costs would come from the city covering health insurance premium increases for all employees earning less than $40,000.

Mr. Roberts said he is still adamant that nonunion employees earning more than $40,000 shoulder higher health insurance contributions. Their ranks include council members, managers and department heads.

Council members have argued that nonunion workers, who haven't received raises in years, should not have to pay higher health insurance contributions. That disagreement has resulted in a budget impasse.

Council must pass a budget by year's end, and is scheduled to take a final vote on Monday. If the state-appointed Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority doesn't approve it, state funds may be withheld and the authority could intercept new tax revenue next year.

The authority and Act 47 team are working together in talks with council.

(Rich Lord can be reached at rlord@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1542.)