October 31, 2009
Foster's actions less than prudent
In its endorsement of Mary Foster for mayor of Peekskill, The Journal News asserted that the Foster administration's reserve spending is "prudent."
For decades, the City of Peekskill struggled with cash-flow problems, taking short-term loans on unfavorable terms to pay its bills. Meanwhile, its neighbors maintained unreserved fund balances as high as 20 percent of their operating budgets. Only in the past decade was Peekskill able to dig its way out of a hole, set aside money in savings, and create a level of financial protection.
That was then. As published reports noted, the city's unreserved fund now holds only $3.2 million and, if the proposed 2010 budget is approved, the city will be in violation of the city's fund balance policy. At the administration's current rate of reserve spending, $3.2 million would last less than two years. Given the economy, no one can predict whether that amount will be adequate to cover cash-flow shortages and cushion other bumps in the road, from falling revenues to rising costs.
The Foster administration now claims it has found another $3.5 million in reserves, money that can be set aside for "tax stabilization." But this move could well jeopardize the city's bond rating, and with it, access to credit on good terms. It also may leave us unprotected in 2011, when the State Comptroller's office projects that all municipalities will be paying significantly increased state pension and health-care costs.
All of this is "prudent"?
Emily Waff Cunningham
Peekskill
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
My Letter to the Editor on Peekskill's Budget
Ran today, 10/21/09. What I didn't know when I wrote this was that the city will drain its "unreserved" fund by more than half in order to facilitate a zero percent tax increase for 2010. See reporter Mary Dempsey's article in my last blog entry or at www.ncnlocal.com.
Peekskill is in trouble
To the Editor:
As a Peekskill resident and homeowner, I find the city’s budget trends troubling and hope our three mayoral candidates will discuss this elephant in the room. We’ve heard little about this serious issue.
In 2008, the city took more than $1.1 million from reserves to cover an operating budget shortfall. In 2009, the budget gap doubled, to more than $2.2 million. It’s worth noting that the city is reporting a shortfall of around $263,000 for 2009, but the choice to report in this way is misleading. Unlike in 2008, in 2009 the city appropriated a large amount ($2 million) from its savings at the beginning of the year, rather than at year’s end. An apples-to-apples comparison of the budget gap would be: $1,127,118 in 2008, and approximately $2,263,000 by the end of 2009. In 2010, the city plans to draw another $1.5 million from the fund balance. How long can this continue?
There are other red flags. In a short period of time, the city administration and school district have proposed three new taxes: a transfer tax, a utility tax, and a hotel room tax, all measures that would raise desperately needed cash without having to resort to property tax increases. These are smart moves, as raising property taxes would trigger more public scrutiny and pressure to reduce spending. But they are also signs that we need to start asking questions now, while the negative trend is still reversible.
Perhaps the biggest sign of a problem is the city’s debt service ratio. A best practice in municipal finance is to keep debt payment levels at 5 percent or less of the operating budget. Peekskill was doing that up until fiscal 2008. But by fiscal 2010, the city’s debt service payments will shoot up to $3,783,284, or 11 percent of the city’s proposed budget. That’s more than one in ten city dollars going to pay interest and/or principal on borrowed money. While city officials hope to sell a recently purchased parcel of land quickly to relieve this debt, if they can’t, we’re stuck with quite a burden.
All of this would seem less serious if city officials had projections showing that economic development would result in a net tax revenue increase for the city. But we have seen no such projections for any future year. There is simply no connection between today’s budget realities and tomorrow’s development plans. Meanwhile, mortgage tax revenues are down, sales tax revenues are down, and the needs of Peekskill residents have been dramatically increased by the recession.
It would be an enormous service if the upcoming elections could be a forum for honestly discussing Peekskill’s financial situation. We who live in this city need this information in order to understand what shape the future might take.
Emily Waff Cunningham
Peekskill
Peekskill is in trouble
To the Editor:
As a Peekskill resident and homeowner, I find the city’s budget trends troubling and hope our three mayoral candidates will discuss this elephant in the room. We’ve heard little about this serious issue.
In 2008, the city took more than $1.1 million from reserves to cover an operating budget shortfall. In 2009, the budget gap doubled, to more than $2.2 million. It’s worth noting that the city is reporting a shortfall of around $263,000 for 2009, but the choice to report in this way is misleading. Unlike in 2008, in 2009 the city appropriated a large amount ($2 million) from its savings at the beginning of the year, rather than at year’s end. An apples-to-apples comparison of the budget gap would be: $1,127,118 in 2008, and approximately $2,263,000 by the end of 2009. In 2010, the city plans to draw another $1.5 million from the fund balance. How long can this continue?
There are other red flags. In a short period of time, the city administration and school district have proposed three new taxes: a transfer tax, a utility tax, and a hotel room tax, all measures that would raise desperately needed cash without having to resort to property tax increases. These are smart moves, as raising property taxes would trigger more public scrutiny and pressure to reduce spending. But they are also signs that we need to start asking questions now, while the negative trend is still reversible.
Perhaps the biggest sign of a problem is the city’s debt service ratio. A best practice in municipal finance is to keep debt payment levels at 5 percent or less of the operating budget. Peekskill was doing that up until fiscal 2008. But by fiscal 2010, the city’s debt service payments will shoot up to $3,783,284, or 11 percent of the city’s proposed budget. That’s more than one in ten city dollars going to pay interest and/or principal on borrowed money. While city officials hope to sell a recently purchased parcel of land quickly to relieve this debt, if they can’t, we’re stuck with quite a burden.
All of this would seem less serious if city officials had projections showing that economic development would result in a net tax revenue increase for the city. But we have seen no such projections for any future year. There is simply no connection between today’s budget realities and tomorrow’s development plans. Meanwhile, mortgage tax revenues are down, sales tax revenues are down, and the needs of Peekskill residents have been dramatically increased by the recession.
It would be an enormous service if the upcoming elections could be a forum for honestly discussing Peekskill’s financial situation. We who live in this city need this information in order to understand what shape the future might take.
Emily Waff Cunningham
Peekskill
North County News on Peekskill's Budget
This came out today, 10/21/09, in the North County News
Peekskill to keep tax levy flat
By Mary Dempsey
PEEKSKILL — Even with a $2.3 million increase in spending in the proposed 2010 budget, a decrease in revenue, and cuts in funding from the federal, state and county, there will be a zero percent increase in city taxes this year.But it will come at the expense of draining $3.5 million from the reserve fund balance leaving only $3.2 million, in violation of city policy. The city council’s proposed 2010 $49.4 million budget is $2.3 million over the 2009 spending package and will be the focus of a special meeting Saturday, Oct. 24 to review the city’s public works and the planning and development. The meeting will be held in the city manager’s office from 8-10 a.m.
The recession has adversely affected the city’s economic condition, decreasing mortgage tax and sales tax revenues over the past year, City Manager Rick Finn said.Finn presented the council with the proposed 2010 budget at the Oct. 13 council meeting. Although the budget is above last year’s figure, the property tax will remain the same as 2009.
“This will require the city to decrease its actual tax rate by 42 cents per $100 as a result of the city’s final assessment roll increasing by $347,574,” Finn said.The proposed budget includes a recommendation from Finn that the city reduces its reserve fund by about $3.5 million and put into a new tax stabilization fund to be used during “poor economic times,” according to Finn. The move will leave the reserve fund with $3.2 million in undesignated funds and $7.3 million in designated funds.
The budget includes the use of $1.5 million from the new tax stabilization fund to offset the increase in the 2010 budget.In a Sept. 30 letter from Finn to Mayor Mary Foster and the city council, Finn said the use of these funds might violate the city’s surplus fund policy, but it will be reviewed by the city comptroller and “the city will not be in violation provided that a plan is submitted and accepted by the city council which establishes how the city will restore the fund balance within a five-year period.”
Personnel-related costs make up about 81 percent of the city’s operating budget. As part of the proposed budget, the city has a hiring freeze on all vacant positions through the 2010 fiscal year, he said. The hiring freeze will save the city $532,300, Finn said.The 2010 budget will be hit by a $908,672 increase in debt service costs, which represents 2.7 percent of the proposed increase.The city’s general fund revenues are down $152,613, or 0.5 percent, compared to the 2009 budget. Property sales are down 8.5 percent, decreasing the amount of mortgage tax received by the city. In addition, federal, county and state aid to the city is down over 25 percent, combined.
The city will hold public hearings on Nov. 2 and Nov. 9 on the budget, Foster said.
Peekskill to keep tax levy flat
By Mary Dempsey
PEEKSKILL — Even with a $2.3 million increase in spending in the proposed 2010 budget, a decrease in revenue, and cuts in funding from the federal, state and county, there will be a zero percent increase in city taxes this year.But it will come at the expense of draining $3.5 million from the reserve fund balance leaving only $3.2 million, in violation of city policy. The city council’s proposed 2010 $49.4 million budget is $2.3 million over the 2009 spending package and will be the focus of a special meeting Saturday, Oct. 24 to review the city’s public works and the planning and development. The meeting will be held in the city manager’s office from 8-10 a.m.
The recession has adversely affected the city’s economic condition, decreasing mortgage tax and sales tax revenues over the past year, City Manager Rick Finn said.Finn presented the council with the proposed 2010 budget at the Oct. 13 council meeting. Although the budget is above last year’s figure, the property tax will remain the same as 2009.
“This will require the city to decrease its actual tax rate by 42 cents per $100 as a result of the city’s final assessment roll increasing by $347,574,” Finn said.The proposed budget includes a recommendation from Finn that the city reduces its reserve fund by about $3.5 million and put into a new tax stabilization fund to be used during “poor economic times,” according to Finn. The move will leave the reserve fund with $3.2 million in undesignated funds and $7.3 million in designated funds.
The budget includes the use of $1.5 million from the new tax stabilization fund to offset the increase in the 2010 budget.In a Sept. 30 letter from Finn to Mayor Mary Foster and the city council, Finn said the use of these funds might violate the city’s surplus fund policy, but it will be reviewed by the city comptroller and “the city will not be in violation provided that a plan is submitted and accepted by the city council which establishes how the city will restore the fund balance within a five-year period.”
Personnel-related costs make up about 81 percent of the city’s operating budget. As part of the proposed budget, the city has a hiring freeze on all vacant positions through the 2010 fiscal year, he said. The hiring freeze will save the city $532,300, Finn said.The 2010 budget will be hit by a $908,672 increase in debt service costs, which represents 2.7 percent of the proposed increase.The city’s general fund revenues are down $152,613, or 0.5 percent, compared to the 2009 budget. Property sales are down 8.5 percent, decreasing the amount of mortgage tax received by the city. In addition, federal, county and state aid to the city is down over 25 percent, combined.
The city will hold public hearings on Nov. 2 and Nov. 9 on the budget, Foster said.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
October 13 - Recommended 2010 Budget
Presented at Common Council meeting by City Manager Rick Finn.
TAX DOLLAR DISTRIBUTION (22:00)
13% of what we are taxed goes to the county, 1% to the library, 24% to the city, 62% to the school district.
EXPENSE BY GROUP (22:36)
81% of city budget is personnel. 11% is debt payment, as of 2010. Editorial note: best practice is 5%.
EXPENSE BY FUNCTION
47% of city budget goes to public safety, this includes police, fire, etc.
RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
State forecasts show that New York State will require sharply increased payments by municipalities into the state pension plan. This will be a challenge for Peekskill, if it comes to pass.
SAVINGS (30:11)
The city is imposing a hiring freeze; vacancies not to be filled include two data entry positions with salaries of $59,868 and $66,608. The city will save $532,300 by not filling these positions. "We will re-examine it at the end of 2010," said the city manager.
Department expenditures show a savings, or net decrease from FY09 by approx $259,000. (31:40).
DEBT SERVICE (32:30)
Approved debt service payment in 2009 was $2,874,612. In FY10 it is increasing by $908,672 to $3,783,284.
TRANSFER TO CAPITAL
The city will spend $483,016 on capital projects and equipment in FY10.
TOTAL NET INCREASE IN EXPENSES
$1,137,256
REVENUES FOR FISCAL 2010 (33:50)
APPROPRIATIONS FROM FUND BALANCE (34:31)
$2 million was taken from reserves in FY09. A projected $1.5 million will be taken from reserves in FY10. These monies are being spent in order to fill the operating budget gap.
RESCO (35:19)
Payment to city is increasing signficantly in FY10, from $4.1 million to $4,878,014, an 18.28% increase.
TAX RATE (36:56)
Earlier the city manager had reported that there would be a slight tax rate increase. Now he is reporting that there will be "a slight reduction" in the tax rate.
WATER FUND (37:20)
Will decrease expenses by $428,796 in FY10, to $6,522,999. This savings caused by a hiring freeze, the elimination of a water meter reader position, and the elimination of 2 laborer positions no longer needed as new water treatment plant is coming online.
There may be a potential increase in water rates (39:44). This is because the new water treatment plant is coming on line. To be discussed in Feb or March 2010. Sewer fund also discussed, after water fund.
SECTION 8 FUND (41:00)
Increasing by $1.6 million for inspectors of Section 8 property; federal dollars pay for this.
TAX DOLLAR DISTRIBUTION (22:00)
13% of what we are taxed goes to the county, 1% to the library, 24% to the city, 62% to the school district.
EXPENSE BY GROUP (22:36)
81% of city budget is personnel. 11% is debt payment, as of 2010. Editorial note: best practice is 5%.
EXPENSE BY FUNCTION
47% of city budget goes to public safety, this includes police, fire, etc.
RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
State forecasts show that New York State will require sharply increased payments by municipalities into the state pension plan. This will be a challenge for Peekskill, if it comes to pass.
SAVINGS (30:11)
The city is imposing a hiring freeze; vacancies not to be filled include two data entry positions with salaries of $59,868 and $66,608. The city will save $532,300 by not filling these positions. "We will re-examine it at the end of 2010," said the city manager.
Department expenditures show a savings, or net decrease from FY09 by approx $259,000. (31:40).
DEBT SERVICE (32:30)
Approved debt service payment in 2009 was $2,874,612. In FY10 it is increasing by $908,672 to $3,783,284.
TRANSFER TO CAPITAL
The city will spend $483,016 on capital projects and equipment in FY10.
TOTAL NET INCREASE IN EXPENSES
$1,137,256
REVENUES FOR FISCAL 2010 (33:50)
APPROPRIATIONS FROM FUND BALANCE (34:31)
$2 million was taken from reserves in FY09. A projected $1.5 million will be taken from reserves in FY10. These monies are being spent in order to fill the operating budget gap.
RESCO (35:19)
Payment to city is increasing signficantly in FY10, from $4.1 million to $4,878,014, an 18.28% increase.
TAX RATE (36:56)
Earlier the city manager had reported that there would be a slight tax rate increase. Now he is reporting that there will be "a slight reduction" in the tax rate.
WATER FUND (37:20)
Will decrease expenses by $428,796 in FY10, to $6,522,999. This savings caused by a hiring freeze, the elimination of a water meter reader position, and the elimination of 2 laborer positions no longer needed as new water treatment plant is coming online.
There may be a potential increase in water rates (39:44). This is because the new water treatment plant is coming on line. To be discussed in Feb or March 2010. Sewer fund also discussed, after water fund.
SECTION 8 FUND (41:00)
Increasing by $1.6 million for inspectors of Section 8 property; federal dollars pay for this.
October 14 - City Budget Review
This budget review session covered only the expense side of the FY10 proposed budget; revenues will be covered in a later session. Not all departments were discussed in this session; it is "to be continued."
CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT (1:42)
1 management and 2 union staff. Percent salary increases are factored in for union employees as per contract (11:05). In 2009, management salaries were frozen; in 2010 there is no recommendation as of yet; funds have been set aside in case of a decision to increase. (12:19)
Vacancies: as vacancies arise they will not be filled; other departments will be called on to help with the workload (16:51). The city is saving approx $500,000 this year by not filling positions (18:53). Performance review system described by city manager (21:40).
POLICE DEPT (24:20)
To create savings, budgeting based on realistic timeline for when vacant positions will be filled, rather than budgeting an entire year's salary.
Overtime: overtime is signficant, but is being monitored, said the police chief (26:40). They have not been able to cut it back. There are 62 sworn officers in the dept (total dept staff count not reported - 27:38). There are anticipated retirements among sworn officers (30:50). Six employees are out on compensation (33:49).
New positions: in 2008, three positions were added but they weren't filled right away (34:30). They've been filled now.
Truck purchase: Dep Mayor Don Bennett asked if there could be a truck purchase (58:20). "This year we certainly can't do it," police chief. Only if find some grant money for this purpose. Bennett expressed concern about "hand-me-down" 8-cylinder vehicles. Finn explained that no more 8-cylinder vehicles would be purchased; the standard is 6-cylinder, there is a plan to buy more vehicles this year (59:50).
Other expenses (1:09): estimated 10% increase in health insurance costs. Upgrading of video and radio equipment, covered by grant.
Overall, slight decrease in police dept budget for FY10, per Mayor Foster (1:16), and the dept is on budget for 2009. "Actually, we're a little below," police chief said.
Workers comp: police dept employees who are out on comp get full salary; workers comp reflects medical payments. (1:18). One employee is permanently disabled, likely to retire on disability. There's a new tier now, tier 5 employees: benefits are not as full. Tier 5 benefits include retirement after 22 years of service, must make a 3% annual contribution to one's own retirement savings; half of social security benefits will be taken to reimburse pension plan.
Animal control has reduced its expenses by reducing its contract with the SPCA and effectively getting more stray animals adopted.
CITY MANAGER DEPT (1:36)
Budget going up 10% due to shifting of salary for Assistant City Manager into this dept. City Manager salary allocated over several depts per auditor's suggestion.
CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT (1:42)
1 management and 2 union staff. Percent salary increases are factored in for union employees as per contract (11:05). In 2009, management salaries were frozen; in 2010 there is no recommendation as of yet; funds have been set aside in case of a decision to increase. (12:19)
Vacancies: as vacancies arise they will not be filled; other departments will be called on to help with the workload (16:51). The city is saving approx $500,000 this year by not filling positions (18:53). Performance review system described by city manager (21:40).
POLICE DEPT (24:20)
To create savings, budgeting based on realistic timeline for when vacant positions will be filled, rather than budgeting an entire year's salary.
Overtime: overtime is signficant, but is being monitored, said the police chief (26:40). They have not been able to cut it back. There are 62 sworn officers in the dept (total dept staff count not reported - 27:38). There are anticipated retirements among sworn officers (30:50). Six employees are out on compensation (33:49).
New positions: in 2008, three positions were added but they weren't filled right away (34:30). They've been filled now.
Truck purchase: Dep Mayor Don Bennett asked if there could be a truck purchase (58:20). "This year we certainly can't do it," police chief. Only if find some grant money for this purpose. Bennett expressed concern about "hand-me-down" 8-cylinder vehicles. Finn explained that no more 8-cylinder vehicles would be purchased; the standard is 6-cylinder, there is a plan to buy more vehicles this year (59:50).
Other expenses (1:09): estimated 10% increase in health insurance costs. Upgrading of video and radio equipment, covered by grant.
Overall, slight decrease in police dept budget for FY10, per Mayor Foster (1:16), and the dept is on budget for 2009. "Actually, we're a little below," police chief said.
Workers comp: police dept employees who are out on comp get full salary; workers comp reflects medical payments. (1:18). One employee is permanently disabled, likely to retire on disability. There's a new tier now, tier 5 employees: benefits are not as full. Tier 5 benefits include retirement after 22 years of service, must make a 3% annual contribution to one's own retirement savings; half of social security benefits will be taken to reimburse pension plan.
Animal control has reduced its expenses by reducing its contract with the SPCA and effectively getting more stray animals adopted.
CITY MANAGER DEPT (1:36)
Budget going up 10% due to shifting of salary for Assistant City Manager into this dept. City Manager salary allocated over several depts per auditor's suggestion.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
City Revenue and Expense Trends - 9/29/09 Work Session
REAL PROPERTY TAX
A five-year bar chart was shown (2:02). The property tax revenue projection for FY10 is flat; the city will collect the same amount as in FY09. However, according to City Manager Rick Finn, the tax rate will go up "a little bit" because the assessed value of property in the city went down.
Looking at prior years, the bar chart shows that there was a signficant property tax hike between 2004 and 2005.
SALES TAX REVENUE - 5-year trend (3:54)
Sales tax revenues have been on the decline since 2007. There was a decline from 2008 to 2009, from approximately $3.1M to approx $2.8M. The FY10 projection is $3M.
MORTGAGE TAX REVENUE
Steep dropoff since 2007 (5:35). The city projects $479K in revenues for FY09, down from a high of $1.8M in 2005. Projection for FY10 is $500K.
RESCO PILOT (9:52)
A significant increase in PILOT revenues is projected for FY10 -- approx $4.1M, up from $3.5M (this is the city's portion of the PILOT; the other half goes to the school district).
STATE AID (10:48)
Projection remains level at $2.4M. No word from the state yet on whether state aid to municipalities will be cut.
ACTUAL REVENUES VS. EXPENSES (11:40)
Over the last 5 years, the city drove a surplus (revenues exceeded expenses) for FY05, 06, 07. For FY08 and FY09, the city has shortfalls. The reported shortfalls were $1,127,563 for 2008 and $263,000 (approx) for 2009. EDITORIAL NOTE: these shortfall numbers do not compare apples to apples. The $1,127,563 figure shows the 2008 budget shortfall prior to fund balance funds being drawn down to eliminate the shortfall. The $263k figure is in addition to $2 million drawn from the fund balance at the beginning of 2009. An apples-to-apples comparison of the city budget gap would be: $1,127,563 for 2008; approximately $2,263,000 projected for 2009.
DEBT SERVICE
5-year trend shows $2.5M in debt service payments in 2007, $2.5M in 2008, $2.8M in 2009 and $3.5M in 2010. The city comptroller characterized this as an almost $1M increase in debt service payments projected for FY2010. EDITORIAL: holding debt service payments at 5% is considered best practice in municipal finance, or so I have heard. The FY2010 figure appears to be around 10%.
LAYOFFS
There will be none. "No one has lost their job, that's something to be proud of," said City Manager Rick Finn. He has imposed a temporary hiring freeze. The police department has not been affected. Three new police officers were just hired (presumably these were budgeted positions, not new positions?).
A five-year bar chart was shown (2:02). The property tax revenue projection for FY10 is flat; the city will collect the same amount as in FY09. However, according to City Manager Rick Finn, the tax rate will go up "a little bit" because the assessed value of property in the city went down.
Looking at prior years, the bar chart shows that there was a signficant property tax hike between 2004 and 2005.
SALES TAX REVENUE - 5-year trend (3:54)
Sales tax revenues have been on the decline since 2007. There was a decline from 2008 to 2009, from approximately $3.1M to approx $2.8M. The FY10 projection is $3M.
MORTGAGE TAX REVENUE
Steep dropoff since 2007 (5:35). The city projects $479K in revenues for FY09, down from a high of $1.8M in 2005. Projection for FY10 is $500K.
RESCO PILOT (9:52)
A significant increase in PILOT revenues is projected for FY10 -- approx $4.1M, up from $3.5M (this is the city's portion of the PILOT; the other half goes to the school district).
STATE AID (10:48)
Projection remains level at $2.4M. No word from the state yet on whether state aid to municipalities will be cut.
ACTUAL REVENUES VS. EXPENSES (11:40)
Over the last 5 years, the city drove a surplus (revenues exceeded expenses) for FY05, 06, 07. For FY08 and FY09, the city has shortfalls. The reported shortfalls were $1,127,563 for 2008 and $263,000 (approx) for 2009. EDITORIAL NOTE: these shortfall numbers do not compare apples to apples. The $1,127,563 figure shows the 2008 budget shortfall prior to fund balance funds being drawn down to eliminate the shortfall. The $263k figure is in addition to $2 million drawn from the fund balance at the beginning of 2009. An apples-to-apples comparison of the city budget gap would be: $1,127,563 for 2008; approximately $2,263,000 projected for 2009.
DEBT SERVICE
5-year trend shows $2.5M in debt service payments in 2007, $2.5M in 2008, $2.8M in 2009 and $3.5M in 2010. The city comptroller characterized this as an almost $1M increase in debt service payments projected for FY2010. EDITORIAL: holding debt service payments at 5% is considered best practice in municipal finance, or so I have heard. The FY2010 figure appears to be around 10%.
LAYOFFS
There will be none. "No one has lost their job, that's something to be proud of," said City Manager Rick Finn. He has imposed a temporary hiring freeze. The police department has not been affected. Three new police officers were just hired (presumably these were budgeted positions, not new positions?).
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
City's Response on Follow Up: Lightening Quick
I received very speedy, same-day responses from the City in response to my follow-up email to Mr. Stargiotti. To summarize: Mayor Foster emailed the document I requested. Mr. Stargiotti sent an email that explained the city's internal process in handling FOI requests (they all automatically get legal review). And I received this email response from City Manager Rick Finn:
Ms. Cunningham:
Please accept my personal apology for the delay and any inconvenience that you have experienced while you requested the City’s Six month Financial statement. I have given very clear direction to the Finance office that once any Financial statement is completed and sent to the Mayor and City Council it is to be considered a public document and it will be made immediately available for public review. This would include providing a copy to any one requesting the same and also sending a copy via email if requested. I have also directed the Finance office to begin placing all of the City’s Financial statements on the City Web site. Again, please accept my apology and if you have any other concerns about any City operation please feel free to contact me at this email address.
Thank you
Rick Finn
City Manager
Ms. Cunningham:
Please accept my personal apology for the delay and any inconvenience that you have experienced while you requested the City’s Six month Financial statement. I have given very clear direction to the Finance office that once any Financial statement is completed and sent to the Mayor and City Council it is to be considered a public document and it will be made immediately available for public review. This would include providing a copy to any one requesting the same and also sending a copy via email if requested. I have also directed the Finance office to begin placing all of the City’s Financial statements on the City Web site. Again, please accept my apology and if you have any other concerns about any City operation please feel free to contact me at this email address.
Thank you
Rick Finn
City Manager
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
