Projected surplus may put city back in black

[steven]

"We're managing the heck out of our departments."

Buffalo ended its fiscal year $12.3 million in the black, according to preliminary figures released this week by the budget office.
The surplus could increase or decrease as the city comptroller makes modifications before closing the books this fall on the fiscal year that ended June 30.

The projected surplus must be put into perspective. The city, working with the control board, borrowed $19 million last year to make ends meet.

"Without those funds, the fiscal year would have been in deficit," said Dorothy A. Johnson, the control board's executive director in a written statement.

Still, control board officials concurred with Mayor Anthony M. Masiello that the report indicates that Buffalo is making continued progress in its push to regain fiscal stability.

"Overall, this is tremendously good news," said Masiello. "It shows that on the expense side, we're managing the heck out of our departments."

He said personnel costs in all departments were below budget as the city continued to shrink its work force through attrition and hold down overtime. Personnel costs in the Police Department were $850,000 under budget, while the Fire Department was $800,000 below estimates. The Public Works Department spent nearly $470,000 less than projected.

City Comptroller Andrew A. SanFilippo called the preliminary figures "encouraging," but he stressed there are still variables that could alter the fiscal picture. He noted that the city has yet to receive its final bill for employee pension costs or confirm sales tax revenues. This week's report uses projections for these items.

SanFilippo added that the surplus would shrink if any pending lawsuits targeting the city's wage freeze result in rulings or settlements that require retroactive raises.

"There could be significant alterations over the next several months that affect the city's bottom-line fund balance," he said.

The 100-page report red-flagged other fiscal pressures that continue to cause concern, including rising health insurance, pension and utility costs. Budget analysts said leaving vacant jobs unfilled will help absorb some of the higher expenses this year, and that increased state aid promised next year will help cushion the impact of escalating expenses.

"But ultimately, these cost areas must be controlled for the city to survive and prosper," the report warned. Some positive trends cited in the report include:

• Projected sales tax and property tax revenues were higher than anticipated.

• The cost of fringe benefits was about $6.4 million under budget, some of it attributable to reductions in the work force.

• Police overtime was more than $500,000 under budget, while police court time was $144,000 lower than anticipated.

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial...04/1046901.asp

[Curmudgeon]

The projected surplus must be put into perspective. The city, working with the control board, borrowed $19 million last year to make ends meet.

????

Are they saying that with the 19 million, they are "in the black", and without it they have a deficit???

[biker]

This is the same type of fuzzy reporting that attended last year's final report in the Fall.

Brian Meyer is clearly out of his element.

Since the Administration argued with the Control Board to borrow funds last year to tear down houses (which they then didn't spend. Which also would not be a capital expenditure. Which are both topics for other threads.), yes they are borrowing to cover operating costs.

Which means they aren't operating in the black.

Which means the story's total premise is wrong.

But it lets people like Citymouse throw enough gorilla dust in the air to confuse the issue further. Remember his "the City has operated in the black for years."?

He knows better. But he can point to a dimwit article like this as support.

But then, you know how unions use "facts", right. Like the drunk uses a lamp-post: more for support than enlightenment.

The real story seems to be that the City is making slow, painful progress. The true deficit was only $7.0 million. Maybe it'll actually take in more than it spends some day.

But it'll probably take many years of fewer cops, firefighters and teachers and wage freezes for all.

[WestCoastPerspective]

I've never seen a $7 million deficit become a 'surplus.' Only in government accounting I guess!

[biker]

I tried to follow it up myself.

The article said the Comptroller had issued a 100 page report.

So I went to the Comptrollers portion of the City's home page. Nothing there.

So I went to Comptroller's press releases. The latest entry was from February, saying we should sell the water system.

I guess the article is confusing and ill-written because he couldn't see this mysterious report either.

[biker]

Well, The News editorial last night clarified what its article should have made clear in the first place: "If someone gave you $19.0 million, you'd probably be able to show a $12.0 million surplus, too."

This may be progress, Perhaps they borrowed less than the previous year? Perhaps they borrowed less than last year? We don't know, cause the article by Meyer is such a botched job.

Put it in personal terms. You show a "surplus" every time you buy a new home and borrow $100,000 for the mortgage. That's goofy.

BTW-I seem to remember that the Control Board and the City Administration were arguing in the Spring of 2004 about borrowing. TheCB said they didn't need to. TheCity said they needed the funds to tear down houses. The CB gave them the money. Months later (Fall '04) the CB complained that no houses had come down.

So---is the City in better or worse shape?

I don't know.

Is the Comptroller as dopey as this indicates?

Maybe

[citymouse]

Originally posted by biker



But it lets people like Citymouse throw enough gorilla dust in the air to confuse the issue further. Remember his "the City has operated in the black for years."?

He knows better. But he can point to a dimwit article like this as support.

Hey, all I know is what I read in the papers.

[biker]

Then to be clear:

The City did not have a surplus last year.

It did not have a surplus the year before.

It will not have a surplus this year.

If the City Comptroller were in an SEC-regulated company, he'd be sharing a cell with Bernie Ebbers.

If the City would tell us what it's position really was and has been over the past few years, we could see if it was making progress.

Unlike Erie County, the City doesn't post its audits on the web.

If we had the correct information, we could perhaps forecast the day when it might earn a real surplus.

Then it can repay the built-up deficits.

Then it can consider pay raises.

About 2032, by my reckoning.

[WNYresident]

Who assumes your in the black when you owe other people money.

[biker]

I looked all over the City of Buffalo website for financial statements of any type and couldn't find them. I started by looking for audited statements.

Unlike the County, the City maintains a monopoly on information.

[biker]

Somethings beginning to smell real runny with this story.

I've called up Brian Meyer stories on the city's finances going back 20 months. They all have this doofus confusion about surpluses, borrowings and deficits.

Now maybe I could believe that Comptroller SanFillippo is a dummy, because he's an elected guy.

Maybe reporter Brian Meyer is a dummy, out of his element reporting on financial stuff.

Maybe even Citymouse is a dummy, although I really don't think so.

But all three?

So over two years, the Comptroller issues press releases about surpluses, a reporter unquestionably repeats the lie and Citymouse says he believes it.

Aren't reporters supposed to be inquisitive sceptics?

Doesn't Citymouse disbelieve and despise everything coming out of the Administration?

Or is there some sort of co-ordinated effort going on to create a groundswell of public belief that the City is out of the woods, the Control Board is unnecessary and we can go back to business as usual: the Mayor and Common Council doling out goodies to their union employees/masters?

[steven]

City of Buffalo Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2004
http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/Files/1_...ancial2004.pdf


Summary Statements and Graphs
http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/files/1_...and_Graphs.pdf

General Fund - Summary of Department Revenue by Source
http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/Files/1_..._by_Source.pdf

General Fund - Detail of Revenues by Department
http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/Files/1_...es_by_Dept.pdf

General Fund - Appropriation Summary by Department
http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/Files/1_...ry_by_Dept.pdf

General Fund - General City Charges
http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/Files/1_...ty_Charges.pdf

[biker]

Thanks, steven.

Would you please tell me how you found these?

[citymouse]

Originally posted by biker


Maybe even Citymouse is a dummy, although I really don't think so.

So over two years, the Comptroller issues press releases about surpluses, a reporter unquestionably repeats the lie and Citymouse says he believes it.



Doesn't Citymouse disbelieve and despise everything coming out of the Administration?

Or is there some sort of co-ordinated effort going on to create a groundswell of public belief that the City is out of the woods, the Control Board is unnecessary and we can go back to business as usual: the Mayor and Common Council doling out goodies to their union employees/masters?

Lets adress these remarks one at a time.

The first quote I guess I could take as a backhanded compliment.

On the the second remark I didn't say I believed or disbelieved anything.
I merely quoted Will Rogers. "All I know is what I read in the papers".

On the third, My paycheck comes out of the administration and I certainley don't despise that.

Forth, no there is no conspiricy. While the control board isn't necessary, this council and Mayor hasn't been very good to our union.

I hope I cleared that up.

[biker]

Thanks to Steven, I've been able to download a copy of the June 30, 2004 audited financials. They are over 100 pages long and rather confusing.

(As an aside: this is almost criminal. A little itty-bitty City like Buffalo is not that complex. General Electric runs businesses from aircraft engines to brokerages to TV networks. It issues quarterly financials within 45 of the end of each quarter. When their press release hits the airwaves, it takes about three seconds to see if they made money (haha-of course they did) and how much. The only reason municipalities financials are this hard to read is because of the corrupt morons who run them; they want it that way.)

Although I'm not done, here's how the City puts out that BS about surpluses: it pretends that the borrowing of the Control Board (which turns the dough over to the City) is a revenue to the City!

Can you believe that!!!!

That's like you giving yourself a line of credit check for $100,000 and saying you "made" $100,000.

The only reason the CB borrows is to fund City operations.

In the audit for the year ended June 30, 2004 the City borrowed $25,745,000 through the Control Board.

Ya think the City really had a deficit last year?

Of course it did.