Is anyone surprised that Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhouser and the City Council are struggling to balance the city budget for the coming fiscal year?
After reading today’s article in the Star, I was surprised by not only the amount of the deficit but by the amount of ‘fixed’ expenses that are essentially untouchable.
Out of a reported total budget of $1.3 billion, only about $950 million is supported by general tax revenues. The rest is supported by user fees earmarked for specific services.
$109 million goes toward paying for debt service, most of which is likely for retirement of bond indebtedness. A whopping $88 million goes towards TIF commitments. That leaves $753 million. The Star article claims that only about $100 million is subject to modification. By my calculation that leaves $653 million, or roughly 68% of the budget that is untouchable by virtue of being part of initiatives that were mandated by voters or state law.
Here’s the problem. As mentioned, discretionary spending is $100 million. The projected budget shortfall is around $70 million. I’d say that leaves city officials in a pickle.
City Manager Wayne Cauthen has proposed a plan which would, in essence, wipe out a one-time revenue windfall, and would still require about $34 million in departmental budget cuts.
Does it strike anyone as odd that Funkhouser appears to be surprised by the financial situation? Would one not think that the guy who sat in the city auditor’s chair for over a decade would have a handle on the books? I realize he’s not the budget guru, but you don’t become the ‘auditor of the century’ without having some idea as to the ebb and flow of finances around the shop.
Kansas City is facing a daunting task. There is no easy answer. Short of emptying the piggy-bank for a one year fix, officials are faced with either drastic expense reductions which will undoubtedly reduce city services, or will be forced to go hat in hand to the voters to ask for a tax increase. Neither will likely be well received by residents.
Today is the day elected officials must atone for past indiscretions. This budget should serve as evidence that Funkhouser was right about the need for TIF reforms. Fiscal restraint appears not to have been a high priority for the previous administration, and unfortunately the taxpayers and citizens of Kansas City will pay the price for that.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I am curious, is this no different than in previous administrations or is the Funk dealing with what hand the previous administration dealt him?
Justin Tomac
It sounds like the hole is deeper than in the past. I think Funk inherited the problem, which sounds like a good deal of it comes from the prior administrations' love affair with TIF deals.
I just think it interesting from the perspective of the Star story that Funk appeared to be surprised about the budget shortfall and didn't seem to have a plan to deal with it. You'd think with his prior position he'd be aware of what was on the horizon.
-JNN
By the way, thanks for stopping by! I've seen your posts on Greg's blog before. His is great, but I wanted to do something that applied to the broader metro area, perhaps with a more satirical viewpoint and maybe laced with a little sarcasm thrown in now and then.
-JNN
On a Sarcastic note: You trust the Star's Journalism?
After watching the Funk/Semler/LaRaza railroad job from the sidelines and seeing how they have twisted the facts/views by only half reporting on a few other stories, I find the Star on pace with the Onion and National Enquirer.
Justin Tomac
Only as fodder for public discussion...
Post a Comment