Below is a transcript of part of this video Section 14:45-48:26
Buffalo City Council Meeting September 24th 2012
My Comments Are In Red
Mayor Mead: Next thing on our agenda, is our revised budget for fiscal year September 30th of twelve. This was last years budget that's been revised to meet actual's.
Alderman Horn: So... I have a question. I have a lot of questions. Why do we revise the budget? Can you explain that?
City Administrator: Because if any department is over budget and you don't revise the budget, then you get a nix on your audit report that says you're not meeting your budgetary requirements, for budgeting things before you purchase them.
Alderman Horn: So... Why did we not just raise the categories that went over budget? There's other things that didn't go over budget that got raised and there's something to do with this mayor's discretionary fund, that has disappeared. It was in the budget but...
City Administrator: Because I moved it to the capital where the people, where the money was actually spent.
Alderman Horn: Why?
City Administrator: Because that, any capital items need to be accounted for in the department that spent the money. I tallied up $81,917.06 that was already included in the actual capital amount spent in each department, as of August 2012.
Alderman Horn: So we didn't account for whenever the mayor's discretionary was used, we didn't account for that in a different category? So that we would know.
City Administrator: No it went into each departments capital items. Because that $40,000 was the money that was left to spend capital wise and the board gave the mayor the authority to decide how those items were going to be used throughout the year, last year.
Alderman Stafford: Whoa back up.
City Administrator: K
Alderman Stafford: The 40,000 discretionary fund the board had the decision on how it was to be spent?
City Administrator: Not really.
Alderman Stafford: That's right no.
Mayor Mead: Let me explain procedurely what, how that happened. This year we were in the red, we had to account for $66,000. Last year we had $40,000 on the plus side. So instead of the board going through everyone's wish list and deciding whether or not Roger got two reams of paper, or whether Gus got a ream and a half a piece paper, the police department got half a ream of paper, the board voted, and I didn't get a vote on that, the board voted five to one, that we're not gonna spend meeting after meeting, hour after hour, deciding what department gets what. We're going to let the mayor decide what department gets what, as needs arise in the fiscal year. My point in asking is if we have a category in the budget I'd like to see when we have expenditures in that category. This particular category was actually dissolved into the budget with no actual figures given in regards to how it was spent.
Alderman Stafford: So Debby (City Administrator) you took the mayors discretionary fund from 0 and spread it through the other departments?
City Administrator: It was put in the, to go with the capital where it was spent yes.
Alderman Stafford: So he still has the authority to do what he wants to with the cities money, without council approval?
Mayor Mead: No authority was ever vested.
Alderman Stafford: I'm not going to vote for this, I'll tell ya why. Until the mayors, the ordinances are put in place, and we know exactly how much authority the mayor's got to spend, this ordinance as far as I'm concerned, this budget can set here till Christmas. Because I mean, the rest of you can pass it, you can do whatever you want to, but I want to know, I don't want to come up with $3,000 worth of paintings again on a bill for us to approve. This council still has the authority, the binding authority elected by the people to make sure that their dollars are spent in a good trustworthy way. I'm not going to approve this budget until such time as I know how much money we've spent. And who's got the authority to spend it.
Alderman Horn: I guess what raised my concerns was the budget for the Administration was $269,954 we've raised it in the revised budget to $277,358 but the actual spent as of August, (which I realize there will be more in September) was $233,378. So why did we raise that one if we didn't go over? That goes on with the Police Department the same thing. As of August 31st we still had $36,576 remaining in the administration budget. The amount actually spent in August was $13,737.97. It didn't go over unless we spent $36,576 in September so why raise it $7,404?
City Administrator: Well it was raised because Risa (New Employee) was hired so I added her to the salaries under admin and I added the capital expenditures of $3,000. I didn't touch anything else besides where the board had decided or the mayor had decided to spend the money. There were already capital expenditures of $3,900.34 accounted for as of August 31st 2012 so this does not answer the question.
Alderman Horn: And as far as the police department the budget was $404,859 they spent $340,848 and we've raised it to $429,477. Again the police department had $64,010.71 remaining in their budget as of August 31st 2012. They spent $27,584.44 in August. One additional officer was hired. Unless they spent $64,010.71 in September I don't see a reason to raise their budget $24,618.
City Administrator: Because we raised it for the capital items for the police cars that were purchased. The capital for police cars $30,035.44 is included in the August actual figures of $340,848.29
Alderman Horn: Purchased?
City Administrator: With the boards authority.
Alderman Horn: When?
City Administrator: When did you guys purchase police cars? I don't have a clue. Police cars were purchased before I was elected in April 2012... The bill has been paid and would be (or should be) included in the actual's that each council member is given monthly.
Alderman Stafford: We purchased those last year why put them in this years budget?
City Administrator: Because they were in this last years, this is last years revised budget.
Mayor Mead: This is last years Jess (Alderman Stafford)
Alderman Stafford: But we're approving this years budget.
Alderman Horn: Yes but they would be in this total spent. This is the actual's spent.
Alderman Stafford: This is the budget that we're going to live by for the next 12 months.
City Administrator: No this is the budget we're going to live by for the next nine days. No I'm sorry six days. To close out this fiscal year. This revised budget was increased $40,000
Alderman Stafford: Where's the budget for next year?
City Administrator: This one, it's next.
Alderman Horn: So we haven't approved to buy any police cars in the next nine days.
City Administrator: No
Alderman Horn: We already bought those.
City Administrator: You already bought the police cars I'm just trying to fix your accounting to account for the fact that you bought the police cars. The line item for capital improvements of $30,035.44 is accounted for in the capital line item that is on my printout for August...
Alderman Horn: Then why
City Administrator: Because you did not revise your budget when you made the motion to purchase the police cars.
Alderman Horn: Ok I know but when did we purchase the police cars? Would it be in our actual's that are on this, what I got for the August meeting?
City Administrator: It should be I don't remember when the police cars were purchased.
Alderman Horn: Because it says $340,000 was spent for the police department and we've raised that in this revised budget to $429,477.
City Administrator: Because we, I didn't look at every single line to see exactly how much money they were going to spend for the rest of the fiscal year. I just corrected the lines that were out of, that were gonna be out of balance for the year, meaning the police cars that were purchased and then.
Alderman Horn: What I'm saying is if we already purchased the police cars it would already be in this actual amount.
Alderman Stafford: Was that the $26,000 we spent on vehicle maintenance?
Audience Member: I have a question the very first number that Kristie Horn
Mayor Mead: Let's hold off
Audience Member: shot out is that the original number you guys had on your budget and you just changed it?
Alderman Horn: The original budgeted amount for, just say police department was $404,859. It's been raised for the revised budget to $429,477. As of August 31st this says that we spent $340,848.29 in the police department category. So I'm just asking why we've raised it, raised their budget so much in this revised budget?
City Administrator: Because it was raised based on individual purchases big capital purchases those police cars. I don't know what exactly has been spent on the police department. Last month in the what you guys approved..
Alderman Horn: Well unless we approved to buy police cars in September it should be in this August actual's.
City Administrator: No because you paid bills the first of September. And you've also been paying wages. The police cars were purchased before April 2012.. the figures are in the actual's...
Alderman Horn: But we didn't buy police cars...
City Administrator: No
Alderman Ferrell: We've had them three, four or five months.
Mayor Mead: And that probably will, was the police cars, the program for the police department was something that probably most likely come out of that mayor's discretionary fund. The capital amount of $30,035.44 is already included in the actual spending of $340,848.29
Alderman Stafford: Are you saying Debby (City Administrator) that the $404,000 to the $429,000 is basically salaries?
City Administrator: I don't even have the right... Let me go grab the right minute book cause I don't even have the right minute book. The question goes unanswered.
Alderman Horn: The August actual's say that we spent $27,584 for the police department. So I'm just going to assume that those are for salaries and maybe... We did hire another officer so it would be a little bit higher but they still had $64,000 left in their budget. So I don't understand why we've raised this unless we spent over $64,000 in their budget because they didn't go over.
Alderman Stafford: That $429,000 and $277,000 is for next years budget.
Alderman Horn: That's what they want to revise 2012 to.
Conversation is held in regards to the budget being discussed.
Waiting for City Administrator to re-enter the room...
Alderman Stafford: Where did this $30,000 come from I mean where did it go?
Alderman Rieschel: Which page are you on?
Alderman Stafford: I'm on page two. It says capital expenditures of $30,050. The original budget was $0 and the revised budget is $30,000 what constitutes the other $30,000?
Mayor Mead: Probably the two police cars. They were around $14,000 to $15,000 apiece.
Alderman Horn: But whenever we purchased those police cars it would have been in the bills that we approved and it would have showed up in our actual's. We have, we're given each month the approved budget, the August actual's or month to month actual's, and the total for the year.
Mayor Mead: Maybe it came from the mayor's discretionary fund. I think is where that came from.
Alderman Horn: What?
Mayor Mead: Maybe it came from somewhere else in the budget.
City Attorney: I think what Kristie's (Alderman Horn) asking is when would the, when was the payment for the car made by the city and I think that it was before August is what...
Alderman Stafford: It was way prior to that because they purchased the police cars for the police department prior to the time that I came.
Alderman Horn: That's what I was thinking. Because I don't recall ever doing that.
Alderman Stafford: We didn't.
Alderman Horn: So that bill would have been paid.
City Attorney: That's right.
Alderman Stafford: Right. The bill was paid. My question is how come it just now shows up? I'm not arguing the $30,000. I mean if the $30,000 is two police cars, it's two police cars but why did it not come out on the actual expenses on a monthly basis? Why did it come up at the end of the year? Is that what you're asking?
Alderman Horn: I don't think it did. I think it is in this actual amount and my question is why are we increasing the police departments budget so much when they did not go over? They didn't need to have that increased. The community center went over budget, the airport went over budget, I believe the Fire Department possibly will and the recycling no no the Fire Department and the Pound possibly will because they're very close. But those were the only things that I seen that went over budget and I was just wanting to know why we're revising the budget and raising these other departments when they didn't actually go over?
Alderman Rieschel: The bottom line is when they audited us, we passed. The money that we have spent the last year is gone. It's been spent. We're not for last year, we're doing nothing more than Debby (City Administrator) is having what we spent match our budget. We're not voting to spend any money. When the auditor comes down here and looks at the books I'm not going to be there. I don't have a problem with it adjusting last years budget. Debby has been working at this all year long.
City Administrator: Ok, so like for the police department if based on the bills that have been paid out as of today based on what's in the glt which does not come even close to matching the numbers that you have it's $368,914 And then you add on one more payroll that's gonna take it up to $381,788. This amount is still not over the budgeted amount for the police department so my question still stands... Why are we raising it? I did not do that for every department because it's very time consuming it took me five minutes and I could have easily missed something and if I would've done this a week ago to have put this together for the budget you're talking two more days of work just to get the numbers exact. I was just trying to take the capital items and put them back into the budget. The only other way around this is anytime you guys decide to spend something that you did not budget we need to stop every month and do a new budget. Because this is what happens when you all make motions to spend stuff that isn't in the budget. We have to revise it at the end of the fiscal year to clean it up.
Alderman Horn: Ok the largest amount of money that I heard you say and you said it really quick I couldn't write it down it's still not over $404,859 that was budgeted for the police department. So my question is, why then are we raising their budget in the revised budget to $429,477?
City Administrator: Because no one told me to go back and figure out exactly what each department spent for the fiscal year so we cold make sure they were within budget.
Mayor Mead: So we budget a little bit over that way we...
City Administrator: I just changed the capital items or any line that was majorly over budget to fix it so we could pass the new budget so we could move on to the next year. I didn't go through every line by line because that would be extremely time consuming to go through every line and anticipate their purchases for the next, I mean if I did it a month out when the budget ended that makes me have to anticipate purchases, anticipate payroll, for a one month period. It's very time consuming.
Alderman Horn: So your first answer that that was for the police cars was not correct?
City Administrator: No that is correct it is that's what was increased for was the police cars under the capital items. $30,050.
Alderman Horn: Which was paid when?
City Administrator: Let me grab the minute book.
The question goes unanswered.
Alderman Rieschel: Mr. Mayor I'll make a motion we revise last years budget as submitted.
Mayor Mead: Is there a second?
Alderman Piper: I'll second it.
Mayor Mead: We have a motion... Miss Polston? (City Administrator)
City Administrator: Did somebody second it?
Mayor Mead: Yea we have a motion and a second I'll call for a roll.
Alderman Stafford: Now this is last years budget we're just balancing last years budget?
Alderman Rieschel: You're exactly right. I don't want to make a career out of last years budget.
Alderman Rieschel, Stafford, Hicks, Ferrel, Piper vote Yes
Alderman Horn: vote No.
2013 Fiscal Budget
Mayor Mead: The next item on our agenda is the budget for fiscal year 9/30/13 We have a budget attached to this agenda which is next years budget. It does not have that mayor's discretion that Mr. Stafford commented on. Does anyone have an alternative budget to present?
Alderman Horn: I do not have an alternative budget but I do have something I wanted to show you just to explain why I'm making the decision I'm making. I won't take a lot of your time but I'll hurry.
Mayor Mead: Well we haven't called for a vote yet.
Alderman Horn: That's right, I would like to present why I feel the way I feel if that's all right with you.
Mayor Mead: I yield the floor.
Alderman Horn: I asked Debby (City Administrator) if she would please give me some actual figures for the last two years. I'm not an accountant but I do want to try to make a good educated decision. What I was given were these two forms and I took the total revenue which is here, and I also took the total expenditures which is here on both of them if you would like to see them. Now I put them together and printed these for you if you would like to look at it I just wanted everyone to understand that I am not trying to cause problems. I just feel that we have not considered this current budget in an educated manner. We spent as of, in 2010 we spent over what we made $85,393. From what I understand from these that I was given from Debby. In September 2011 I understand that we overspent by $126,250 and then this past year it's my understanding that we overspent as of $193,889. That's over what we brought in. I know we have a carryover, maybe we have extra money in the bank somewhere else, maybe you don't care, it's ok. I just wanted to share it with you as to why I will not vote for this budget. And that's all.
As of August 2012 the cities revenues were $1,002,837.95. The 2012/2013 proposed revenue is $1,065,500.
City Administrator: Do you have a copy for the minute book?
At the end of September 2010
Total Revenue +$1042,787.21
Total Expenditures -$1,128,180.77
Difference -$85,393.56
At the end of September 2011
Total Revenue +$1,113,080.22
Total Expenditures -$1,239,330.38
Difference -$126,250.16
At the end of August 2012 (1 Month Remaining in Fiscal Year)
Total Revenue +$1,002,837.95
Total Expenditures -$1,196,727.25
Difference -$193,889.30
Alderman Horn: Yea you can have, I'll get you one. I am not an accountant I could have made lots of mistakes and I probably did but this is my understanding from what I received and I'll base my vote on that.
Alderman Stafford: Let me ask you this Kristie, did you put the sewer and water expenditures in this?
Alderman Horn: No this is just General Revenue. I didn't look at anything else.
Alderman Rieschel: And I assume Locust street is in here?
Alderman Horn: No that's just General Revenue. I didn't do Transportation Fund or Water and Sewer Fund at all.
Alderman Rieschel: Mr. Mayor may I comment?
Mayor Mead: Yes
Alderman Rieschel: Kristie do you have a suggestion on cuts on our budget?
Alderman Horn: I would have liked to have us discuss that together and work together on it. I do not feel like I should be doing that by myself.
Alderman Rieschel: You know we went through the budget I think as meticulously as we could. We removed phones and we're just about in my opinion down to the essentials. Where you cut salaries, what do you do now? I don't think that would be a very popular idea. The city and part of it I assume is the economy. As long as we can afford not to make those cuts this year it's my opinion that we shouldn't. We may get to the point where we have no choice. But to cut drastically it's just my opinion from what I've seen that we've cut every non emergency thing that we can cut and if there's anybody on the council that has something else that we can cut I'd like to know what it is. Otherwise I don't know that we have a lot of choice at this point and I know you make the motion before you have the discussion on the budget so I'm going to make a motion, is the salary part of the budget Debby?
City Administrator: No it's a separate.
Alderman Piper: Wayne (Alderman Rieschel) I can't see cutting salaries but I do think there's about three or four people that's not productive enough. I won't mention the names here, I won't go into it but I think them people not being productive enough is the reason for requiring more help.
Alderman Rieschel: We've talked about a system of reporting to supervisors, grading if you will employee's. We do not have that in effect at this time. Before we start dropping the ax or dropping salaries, I don't practice employment law, I never did. But I think a drop in wages is considered a demotion is it not?
City Attorney: It is. Missouri's also an employment at will state.
Alderman Rieschel: Yea that's true. (?) I agree with you Jim (Alderman Piper) That we may need to look if there's some dead weight but I don't know if we can do anything about that at budget time. This is something we need to set up for future events.
Alderman Piper: I think it needs to be looked at.
Alderman Rieschel: I don't see anything that, I mean we talked about candy bars. I don't know of anything else, you now we've gotta provide these services we could cut out recycling and save money. But I think it's the consensus of the board that we not do that. We could cut out animal control.
Alderman Piper: Wayne that's another one, that's another place, I never have really disagreed with the council but I am tonight. Let me tell you why.
Alderman Rieschel: In which regard?
Alderman Piper: Animal control. Is it animal control or is it a sanctuary? Let me tell you why I say that. Down here where I'm working now I've been there for two weeks this last week, two mornings I go shoveling fresh dog manure up out of the yard I take it out to the drive and throw it under the whist? The dogs run loose down there. Before that I spent two weeks down north at the north end of town here, Wayne when the sun goes down the mosquito's eat ya up but when the sun comes up, the starved to death cats come up out of those wrecked cars. We're taking care of the one's out at the shelter but are we being fair to the one's that's starving? I guess you gotta find something good about it. The only thing I can find good about it is them starved cats there is no mice and rats down North of town. That's the only good thing I can see about it. But our animal shelter's run like a sanctuary to me.
Alderman Rieschel: Right
Alderman Piper: I'm sorry.
Alderman Rieschel: And I guess tonight we're here to discuss the budget and with that in mind Debby I assume that you feel comfortable with the budget?
City Administrator: This was exactly what we talked about at the end of the last meeting.
Alderman Rieschel: I make a motion we adopt the budget for 2012/2013.
Alderman Horn: My last comment that I would like on the record is that we did not cut this budget. It's actually been raised $61,140 (The actual amount is $64,140 I misspoke) If you take out that carryover amount of $400,000 for this last year, yes we only have $200,000 for this year because we've spent half of it. The bottom line is $61,000 $64,140 more than last years budget.
Mayor Mead: We have a motion is there a second?
Alderman Piper: Yes
Mayor Mead: We have a second, I'll call for a role for vote.
Alderman Rieschel: Before you do... now's the time for discussion if anybody wants to comment.
Mayor Mead: Is there any further discussion?
Alderman Stafford: I have a comment just what I said. I'm not against the budget but I'm not going to let this budget be an open check book to do what you want to without approval of the council. That's it.
Alderman Rieschel: Jess I don't think that it's in there.
Alderman Stafford: No Wayne, it wasn't in last years either. You voted to give discretionary money. I went from a $40,000 surplus to $61,000 deficit. That's kinda strong. $100,000 swing. I just think there was way too much money spent that are the cities money without approval of the council. I've said my say.
Alderman Rieschel: And I will support you on the vast majority of what you're saying on an ordinance.
Alderman Stafford: Right because the ordinance is the ordinance but this seems to me is a dollar and cents it's an open check book until it's controlled. You gentlemen can pass it, please pass it but I'm not gonna change my mind. As far as I'm concerned about the open check book and city money being spent without the approval of the six people on this council. And that's my right.
Mayor Mead: Is there any other discussion?
Alderman Ferrell: Is there a discretionary fund at this time? Is there a discretionary fund now?
Alderman Stafford: There is none. I'm not saying that the budgets not right. It is the budget and we're going to have to live with it. It's just that I want to see how the dollars are spent on the day to day basis. It's not here. You gotta have the budget and it should be approved but I'm just not gonna do it. Until the ordinances are changed to have more control we've got to go with the budget. Mines just a protest vote, it's just me, it's just.
Alderman Ferrell: When's that gonna come up? I know we worked on it a while back.
Alderman Stafford: We're gonna have to redo it. We're going to have to do it because whenever we get it we have to we're changing about 20 different ordinances I believe was that right?
City Attorney: About six
Alderman Stafford: About six and we had to make sure that the six we were changing were not being changed for the worse. I'm hoping that what we're changing is for the better. So that everything we do is not a discussion a year from now. Its why our budget did not balance. It's a safeguard for the citizens of Buffalo. It's a safeguard for the council. I think you ought to pass the budget. Then I think we better do I think the revisions on the spending ordinances got to be changed. It can be done at a later date. Mines a protest vote. I looked at $3,000 worth of money last Thursday night and I just went bonkers I'm sorry. That's just me. That's my statement call for a second vote for the budget but I've said what I wanted to say.
Mayor Mead: Is there anymore discussion? I will call for a role of the vote.
City Administrator: Wayne:
Alderman Rieschel: Aye
City Administrator: James
Alderman Ferrell: Aye
City Administrator: Jim?
Alderman Piper: Aye
City Administrator: Kristie?
Alderman Horn: No.
City Administrator: Jess?
Alderman Stafford: No
City Administrator: Larry?
Alderman Hicks: No
Mayor Mead: I'll cast the tie breaking vote and the budget is approved.
Click here to view the video...
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Mayors Comments: Sometimes Ordinances Don't Matter...
Below is a transcript of part of this video. Section 0:15-6:33
Buffalo City Council Meeting September 17th 2012
My comments are in red.
Mayor Mead: "We've had a little bit of criticism lately of the city not following it's ordinances. It's been public criticism. It's kind of run the gamut to the cities been corrupt for the last 19 years to we're simply not following our ordinances and are in violation of the law. I've spent quite a bit of time discussing with our city attorney whether or not the city has violated it's laws, and the answer is no. I can tell the public kind of what happened after our first budget meeting. (An attorney's opinion is still an opinion. More educated than mine yes, but still an opinion.)
Debby (City Administrator) came to me and said, "Andrew, the way we've done things hasn't exactly reflected perfectly with what the laws may suggest." We discussed the notion of having the budget approved by the regular meeting in September, which is the first meeting in September. Debby mentioned, "hey I'll put together and ordinance, we'll send it to Travis (City Attorney) and we'll sure up any deficiencies in as much as, we make our ordinances mirror what we actually do." I said, "That's a good idea." At the time I thought it was and at the time Debby thought it was. I imagine I can't speak for you Travis but Travis at the time you thought it was a good idea.
After further review we found out it's not a good idea because we are in compliance with our laws. And let me go over that briefly. If you look at section 145.060 see below for entire ordinance the budget calendar it states in there, the Board of Alderman shall prepare the city budget in accordance with the following calendar. Now granted this is just a calendar. It doesn't set any strict and rigid rules. It sets forth what I would say are guidelines. It does state that the budget shall be submitted to the Board of Alderman at the regular meeting in September. Well if it's going to be submitted to the Board of Alderman that means it comes from someone else's hands, provided to the Board of Alderman by the regular meeting in September. That was in our hands, when was that Debby? First of August? Late July. What we need to look at for guidance is section 145.020 Budget Required. See below for entire ordinance. Prior to the commencement of each Fiscal Year, a budget for the City shall be prepared and presented to the Board of Alderman. We've got till October 1st to approve a budget.
If you look at 145.070 Budget Procedures See below for entire ordinance and I'm running through this rather quickly. It says to maximize to the extent practical and to the extent it does not conflict with state law this code or other ordinance budget shall be prepared in accordance with a guide to budgeting from Missouri Municipalities published by the Missouri Municipal League. There is a book out there that provides our guidelines for budgeting. It doesn't say this book is the law, it gives us a reference to guide us. The ordinance states "to the extent it does not conflict with state law, THIS CODE or other ordinance we use this guide."
Another statute that we've completely overlooked in this public debate and that's section 100.140 See below for entire ordinance. All general provisions, terms phrases and expressions contained in this code shall be liberally construed in order that the true intent and meaning of the Board of Alderman may be fully carried out. That means we look at our ordinances liberally, to carry out our intent, the boards intent. This ordinance is in reference to Article II Construction of Ordinances. They are to be constructed in this manner "in order that the full intent and meaning of the Board of Alderman may be carried out." I don't believe this ordinance imply's that anyone should be interpreting every city ordinance liberally as they see fit. What about the traffic ordinances or the ordinances pertaining to public health and safety. Are we going to allow citizens the same freedom to liberally interpret ordinances? That makes no sense.
Our city attorney has looked at our laws and has come the the conclusion that we are not in violation thereof. Is that correct?"
City Attorney: "It is."
Mayor Mead: "So it's my opinion that we continue forward as we always have, not violating our laws. The question was put out there, "Do Ordinances Really Matter?" The truth is ladies and gentlemen, sometimes they don't. I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. Who decides which ones matter and which ones don't? These ordinances are guidelines for us to follow. There's no enumerating penalty if we fail to prepare a budget and approve it by October 1st. They don't fine the mayor. They don't put Jim Piper (Alderman Piper) in prison. There are no enumerated penalties for violating these ordinances. The city doesn't have to pay a fine to the city. We simply strive to do better. Striving to do better was my suggestion from the beginning. We should obey the law in the same manner we expect the citizens of Buffalo to do so. There is also a section that I posted previously detailing punishments for violating the ordinances. Jail time and fines were mentioned. It is Section 100.200 We strive to adhere to these guidelines. We strive to present a budget that is a responsible budget for the city.
Now, there are six people up here who probably feel pretty strongly I've just wasted the first six minutes of our meeting. Does everyone understand that we're ok with our ordinances? Does anyone have any questions? This is a public meeting I understand how it's a lot more fulfilling to go out and post things on the internet and insult people."
Alderman Horn: "I did not insult anyone. I simply stated what I believe to be a fact and I stand by everything I wrote. I do believe that we were not adhering to the guidelines that the ordinance laid out for us. We did not participate in the process of building the budget. It was given to us in seven pages pretty much done, for us to rubber stamp. I disagree with a lot of what you've said tonight."
Mayor Mead: "I understand that mam and you have the opinion of the city attorney and you have an opinion of a second attorney and I understand you may not agree with the attorney's opinions as they pertain to the law. You don't have to that's fine. My question to the public is are there any questions? There are no questions so I'll consider this matter resolved and put behind us." I don't consider this resolved and I stand by everything I've previously said or written in regards to this matter. The ordinance violation for the proper procedure in presenting an ordinance was not considered in this statement either.
Section 100.140 Article II Construction of Ordinances
All general provisions, terms, phrases and expressions contained in this Code shall be liberally construed in order that the true intent and meaning of the Board of Aldermen may be fully carried out. Technical words and phrases having a peculiar and appropriate meaning gin law shall be understood according to the technical import. I believe this pertains to construction of ordinances not in how we are to interpret them.
Section 145.020 Budget Required
Prior to the commencement of each Fiscal Year, a budget for the City shall be prepared, and the same will be presented to and approved by the Board of Aldermen. The format of the budget shall be on file in the City Clerk's office.
Section 145.060
The Board of Aldermen shall prepare the City Budget in accordance with the following calendar:
1. First, the Board of Aldermen will collect the data necessary and make preliminary revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year. They will estimate expenditures for the present year, and note expenditures and revenues for the previous two fiscal years. I understand the City Administrator is a key player in gathering the necessary data. However up to this point the expenditures and revenues for the previous two fiscal years has not been considered in any discussion.
2. Second, the Board of Aldermen will request from each city officer a statement of expenditures requested for the coming fiscal year.
3. Third the city board will review the departmental requests and make their final revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year, and will confer with department heads to discuss these requests. This was not done last year. I specifically requested we meet with department heads which we did.
4. Fourth, the Board of Alderman will begin assembling the City Budget.
5. Fifth, the Board of Aldermen will confer with the Mayor and any such other officers as the Mayor may designate, for preparation of the City Budget for the next fiscal year to be submitted to the Board of Alderman.
6. The budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen at the regular meeting in September.
It seems to me that AFTER the Board of Alderman completes the previous tasks and builds a budget, this would be the final prepared budget presented to vote upon.
145.070 Budget Procedures
To the maximum extent practicable, and to the extent it does not conflict with State law, this Code, or other ordinance, the budget shall be prepared in accordance with "A Guide to Budgeting for Missouri Municipalities" published by the Missouri Municipal League. I will be comparing what we do with this publication.
Article III. Penalties
Section 100.200: General Penalty
A) Whenever in this Code or other ordinance of the city, or in any rule, regulation, notice or order promulgated by any officer or agency of the City under authority duly vested in him/her or it, any act is prohibited or is declared to be unlawful or an offense or the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful or an offense, and no specific penalty is provided for the violation of any such provision of this code or any such ordinance, rule, regulation, notice or order, the violator shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the City or County Jail not exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and punishment; provided that in any case wherein the City and State have a penalty for the same offense, the statutory penalty shall apply, except that imprisonments, when made under city ordinances, may be in the city prison or workhouse, instead of the county jail.
B) Every Day a Violation. Every day any violation of this code or any other ordinance or any such rule, regulation, notice or order shall continue shall constitute a separate offense.
C) Responsibility. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, by an amendment thereof, or by any rule or regulation adopted thereunder, such prohibition shall extend to and include the causing, securing, aiding, or abetting of another person to do said act. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, an attempt to do the act is likewise prohibited.
Buffalo City Council Meeting September 17th 2012
My comments are in red.
Mayor Mead: "We've had a little bit of criticism lately of the city not following it's ordinances. It's been public criticism. It's kind of run the gamut to the cities been corrupt for the last 19 years to we're simply not following our ordinances and are in violation of the law. I've spent quite a bit of time discussing with our city attorney whether or not the city has violated it's laws, and the answer is no. I can tell the public kind of what happened after our first budget meeting. (An attorney's opinion is still an opinion. More educated than mine yes, but still an opinion.)
Debby (City Administrator) came to me and said, "Andrew, the way we've done things hasn't exactly reflected perfectly with what the laws may suggest." We discussed the notion of having the budget approved by the regular meeting in September, which is the first meeting in September. Debby mentioned, "hey I'll put together and ordinance, we'll send it to Travis (City Attorney) and we'll sure up any deficiencies in as much as, we make our ordinances mirror what we actually do." I said, "That's a good idea." At the time I thought it was and at the time Debby thought it was. I imagine I can't speak for you Travis but Travis at the time you thought it was a good idea.
After further review we found out it's not a good idea because we are in compliance with our laws. And let me go over that briefly. If you look at section 145.060 see below for entire ordinance the budget calendar it states in there, the Board of Alderman shall prepare the city budget in accordance with the following calendar. Now granted this is just a calendar. It doesn't set any strict and rigid rules. It sets forth what I would say are guidelines. It does state that the budget shall be submitted to the Board of Alderman at the regular meeting in September. Well if it's going to be submitted to the Board of Alderman that means it comes from someone else's hands, provided to the Board of Alderman by the regular meeting in September. That was in our hands, when was that Debby? First of August? Late July. What we need to look at for guidance is section 145.020 Budget Required. See below for entire ordinance. Prior to the commencement of each Fiscal Year, a budget for the City shall be prepared and presented to the Board of Alderman. We've got till October 1st to approve a budget.
If you look at 145.070 Budget Procedures See below for entire ordinance and I'm running through this rather quickly. It says to maximize to the extent practical and to the extent it does not conflict with state law this code or other ordinance budget shall be prepared in accordance with a guide to budgeting from Missouri Municipalities published by the Missouri Municipal League. There is a book out there that provides our guidelines for budgeting. It doesn't say this book is the law, it gives us a reference to guide us. The ordinance states "to the extent it does not conflict with state law, THIS CODE or other ordinance we use this guide."
Another statute that we've completely overlooked in this public debate and that's section 100.140 See below for entire ordinance. All general provisions, terms phrases and expressions contained in this code shall be liberally construed in order that the true intent and meaning of the Board of Alderman may be fully carried out. That means we look at our ordinances liberally, to carry out our intent, the boards intent. This ordinance is in reference to Article II Construction of Ordinances. They are to be constructed in this manner "in order that the full intent and meaning of the Board of Alderman may be carried out." I don't believe this ordinance imply's that anyone should be interpreting every city ordinance liberally as they see fit. What about the traffic ordinances or the ordinances pertaining to public health and safety. Are we going to allow citizens the same freedom to liberally interpret ordinances? That makes no sense.
Our city attorney has looked at our laws and has come the the conclusion that we are not in violation thereof. Is that correct?"
City Attorney: "It is."
Mayor Mead: "So it's my opinion that we continue forward as we always have, not violating our laws. The question was put out there, "Do Ordinances Really Matter?" The truth is ladies and gentlemen, sometimes they don't. I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. Who decides which ones matter and which ones don't? These ordinances are guidelines for us to follow. There's no enumerating penalty if we fail to prepare a budget and approve it by October 1st. They don't fine the mayor. They don't put Jim Piper (Alderman Piper) in prison. There are no enumerated penalties for violating these ordinances. The city doesn't have to pay a fine to the city. We simply strive to do better. Striving to do better was my suggestion from the beginning. We should obey the law in the same manner we expect the citizens of Buffalo to do so. There is also a section that I posted previously detailing punishments for violating the ordinances. Jail time and fines were mentioned. It is Section 100.200 We strive to adhere to these guidelines. We strive to present a budget that is a responsible budget for the city.
Now, there are six people up here who probably feel pretty strongly I've just wasted the first six minutes of our meeting. Does everyone understand that we're ok with our ordinances? Does anyone have any questions? This is a public meeting I understand how it's a lot more fulfilling to go out and post things on the internet and insult people."
Alderman Horn: "I did not insult anyone. I simply stated what I believe to be a fact and I stand by everything I wrote. I do believe that we were not adhering to the guidelines that the ordinance laid out for us. We did not participate in the process of building the budget. It was given to us in seven pages pretty much done, for us to rubber stamp. I disagree with a lot of what you've said tonight."
Mayor Mead: "I understand that mam and you have the opinion of the city attorney and you have an opinion of a second attorney and I understand you may not agree with the attorney's opinions as they pertain to the law. You don't have to that's fine. My question to the public is are there any questions? There are no questions so I'll consider this matter resolved and put behind us." I don't consider this resolved and I stand by everything I've previously said or written in regards to this matter. The ordinance violation for the proper procedure in presenting an ordinance was not considered in this statement either.
Section 100.140 Article II Construction of Ordinances
All general provisions, terms, phrases and expressions contained in this Code shall be liberally construed in order that the true intent and meaning of the Board of Aldermen may be fully carried out. Technical words and phrases having a peculiar and appropriate meaning gin law shall be understood according to the technical import. I believe this pertains to construction of ordinances not in how we are to interpret them.
Section 145.020 Budget Required
Prior to the commencement of each Fiscal Year, a budget for the City shall be prepared, and the same will be presented to and approved by the Board of Aldermen. The format of the budget shall be on file in the City Clerk's office.
Section 145.060
The Board of Aldermen shall prepare the City Budget in accordance with the following calendar:
1. First, the Board of Aldermen will collect the data necessary and make preliminary revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year. They will estimate expenditures for the present year, and note expenditures and revenues for the previous two fiscal years. I understand the City Administrator is a key player in gathering the necessary data. However up to this point the expenditures and revenues for the previous two fiscal years has not been considered in any discussion.
2. Second, the Board of Aldermen will request from each city officer a statement of expenditures requested for the coming fiscal year.
3. Third the city board will review the departmental requests and make their final revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year, and will confer with department heads to discuss these requests. This was not done last year. I specifically requested we meet with department heads which we did.
4. Fourth, the Board of Alderman will begin assembling the City Budget.
5. Fifth, the Board of Aldermen will confer with the Mayor and any such other officers as the Mayor may designate, for preparation of the City Budget for the next fiscal year to be submitted to the Board of Alderman.
6. The budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen at the regular meeting in September.
It seems to me that AFTER the Board of Alderman completes the previous tasks and builds a budget, this would be the final prepared budget presented to vote upon.
145.070 Budget Procedures
To the maximum extent practicable, and to the extent it does not conflict with State law, this Code, or other ordinance, the budget shall be prepared in accordance with "A Guide to Budgeting for Missouri Municipalities" published by the Missouri Municipal League. I will be comparing what we do with this publication.
Article III. Penalties
Section 100.200: General Penalty
A) Whenever in this Code or other ordinance of the city, or in any rule, regulation, notice or order promulgated by any officer or agency of the City under authority duly vested in him/her or it, any act is prohibited or is declared to be unlawful or an offense or the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful or an offense, and no specific penalty is provided for the violation of any such provision of this code or any such ordinance, rule, regulation, notice or order, the violator shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the City or County Jail not exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and punishment; provided that in any case wherein the City and State have a penalty for the same offense, the statutory penalty shall apply, except that imprisonments, when made under city ordinances, may be in the city prison or workhouse, instead of the county jail.
B) Every Day a Violation. Every day any violation of this code or any other ordinance or any such rule, regulation, notice or order shall continue shall constitute a separate offense.
C) Responsibility. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, by an amendment thereof, or by any rule or regulation adopted thereunder, such prohibition shall extend to and include the causing, securing, aiding, or abetting of another person to do said act. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, an attempt to do the act is likewise prohibited.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Do City Ordinances Really Matter???
Transcript of video from 5:06 to 13:20
Buffalo City Council Meeting September 10th 2012
My comments are in red.
Alderman Horn: "I have a question Debby, about your report. It's about the new activities, I'm going to read it so everyone sitting here can see what I see. "Attached is a new ordinance to change the ordinance section to how it is done. Please let me know if anything needs changed as I would like it approved by the September 24th meeting."
I was brought into the mayors office before this meeting, and chastised for my opinions regarding this. (Mayor Mead said if I would have called him, he would have explained this ordinance was only to enable us to be able to pass the budget. He also stated he was just trying to save me from myself.... What has disabled the council from passing the budget in the past that it needed changing now? And why bother changing it now if the ordinance hasn't been followed for 19 years? I believe everything that goes on with our city council should be public knowledge, we should obey the ordinances and strive for transparency. That is all I'm trying to do. I don't need saving.)
I just want to make it public that the budget ordinance that we have currently, is not being followed. We have in our administration report, she has submitted a new proposal. (Ordinance Section 110.250 outlines the proper procedure for introducing an ordinance. You can find that at the bottom of this posting)
I don't know if anyone would like to see what the new proposal is, but it is not the same as our current budget ordinance. It changes quite a few things to give quite a bit of responsibility to two people, the mayor and our city administrator. Did anyone else on the council notice this at all?"
Alderman Stafford: "I had no problems with it. I noticed it but had no problems with it."
Mayor Mead: "You'd asked a question and I'd like Debby (City Administrator) to respond to that, regarding we're not following our ordinances as currently written."
City Administrator: "This is the way that it's been done for the last 19 years. So this is the way the board's been doing it. The board's never come up with the revenue estimates, the board has never put the preliminary data together, the board has never contacted the department heads and asked them to give their estimates for the year. I've always put the preliminary budget together, then we start having budget meetings with, at one point there was a budget committee but now it's the whole council and then you guys decide what you want put in the budget. (This could be why the budgets are so confusing. The board of alderman needs to be more involved. I believe that is why the current ordinance is written the way it is. I think the city administrator is essential in performing these tasks but the council should be involved in the process and have access to all of this information)
This was not supposed to be me putting the budget together this was what I do now. (What she does now is she puts the budget together.)
I did check with three other cities and the three other cities all do it, have a person in that spot. They all have a budget calendar just like ours. Ozark has their budget officer named which is their city administrator. Fairgrove has their city clerk named first in all of those. Camdenton has a budget officer which is defined as a finance person, the mayor and the city clerk. So I didn't think there was anything out of line. (The point is we're not following the ordinance. If these other cities have this process as their current ordinance they're complying with an existing law. My point is we are not.)
I was just trying to fix an ordinance and the only reason it even came up is I brought it to Andrew's (Mayor Mead) attention that the number six in the previous ordinance said that it had to be adopted at the regular meeting in September and we didn't have it ready to adopt. In the 19 years I've been here we've had it adopted one time at the regular meeting in September. So that is what we were actually trying to fix. I was just trying to fix the rest of it to how we actually do it." (Why not fix how we actually do it to what the ordinance says? Number 6 of Section 145.060 says "The budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen at the regular meeting in September." I don't see anything to say it has to be approved at that time. However, the new proposed ordinance does have that language in there. So when the mayor and city administrator imply we have to pass this ordinance because it says we have to adopt the budget at this time that is incorrect... The current ordinance does not have that requirement.)
Alderman Horn: "Well I'm new and when I was sworn in, I was sworn to uphold the ordinances of the city of Buffalo and I've made every effort to try to get to know these ordinances. I'm not an expert but I do believe that everyone else on this council took the same oath that I took. This is not the only ordinance we're not following. No offense Debby but you don't have the authority to propose an ordinance. (Once again see Section 110.250 for the procedure to introduce an ordinance.)
There's a proper procedure in that one of the alderman are supposed to submit it to our city attorney and then it's supposed to be presented to the council. We're not doing these things correctly because we're not abiding by our city ordinances. We're not going to them and trying to figure out what they say. We're just doing whatever we want to do and I don't think that's right."
City Administrator: "There was no disrespect intended Kristie (Alderman Horn), I was doing things the way we've always done them." (We should be obeying the law.)
Alderman Rieschel: "Let me comment on this. If Donald Duck wants to propose an ordinance to this council he can do it. We'll look over that ordinance, and we'll vote on it. I guarantee the senate of the United States does not write our Federal laws, neither does the state. I was on the school board for six years. It was done pretty much the same way it's done. I think it's nitpicking to come in here, we're trying to conduct business. Debby (City Administrator) does a good job, she's done it a long time and it's absolutely ridiculous to come in here and question it. I'm not going to vote for that ordinance. I've written one ordinance this year and if I like Debby's ordinance, that's fine. As far as I'm concerned keep doing it exactly the way you're doing it. And I don't like your reference to my oath of office. I take it very very seriously and that's another example of nitpicking and you need to quit doing it."
Alderman Horn: "I'm not trying to nitpick. I just, as an average citizen, I am a citizen in the city of Buffalo and I care about the integrity of everyone sitting up here. I think we should all take this more seriously."
Mayor Mead: "Miss Horn and I'll ask you, you stated that our ordinances require our alderman to prepare the budget correct?"
Alderman Horn: "It does."
Mayor Mead: "And that our board has to approve it by the first regular meeting in September. Is that correct?"
Alderman Horn: "That's what it says."
Mayor Mead: "Have you done anything to prepare our budget? Do you have a budget ready prepared to present to the board for us to vote on this evening?"
Alderman Horn: "We're supposed to do that together and this is something that was just brought to my attention."
Mayor Mead: "Have you done anything?"
Alderman Horn: "Yes, I've attended every meeting and I've tried diligently to read the ordinances and understand them because I believe that this is what's supposed to be our guide. Not just what we think. There's laws theres a reason for laws. We should follow them." (I've also tried very hard to ask questions at meetings regarding the budget. I've asked for help from professionals who are experienced in budgeting. Everyone is as confused as I am by what's been presented.)
Mayor Mead: "Do you think it would be wise to tailor our laws to mirror what we're doing to what's efficient and what's been effective or do you have a budget to present for passage this evening?"
Alderman Horn: "That's not my responsibility. That's the councils responsibility. As a whole it is our responsibility."
Mayor Mead: "Have you done anything above and beyond what the other five alderman have done?"
Alderman Horn: "I'm not insinuating that I have. I am just stating and bringing it to the boards attention that we are not following the city ordinances."
Mayor Mead: "Ok. Again would it be out of line to propose and ordinance that would make it easier for us to get our budget passed?"
Alderman Horn: "It would but we need to follow the ordinances until such time as we change them. We can't do as we please and then change it to suit us that's wrong. We would be outraged if our Federal government were doing this. I am outraged I think this is not the way things should be done."
Mayor Mead: "Any other questions regarding administration? Any other comments by our administration?"
Section 110.250 Procedure as to Ordinances, Resolutions, ETC.
All ordinances and resolutions shall be introduced to the Board of Aldermen in written form with the name of the Alderman introducing the same endorsed thereon. All proposed ordinances shall be prepared by the City Attorney or bear his/her certification that they are in correct form. A copy thereof shall be sent to each member of the Board of Aldermen in advance of the meeting, to which copy shall be attached a brief resume of the bill together with the reasons for introduction thereof (as prepared by the proponent thereof), and if any amendment of an existing ordinance is proposed, the nature of the change sought to be made. Failure to follow the procedure shall not invalidate any ordinance or resolution adopted by the Board of Alderman.
Article III. Penalties
Section 100.200: General Penalty
A) Whenever in this Code or other ordinance of the city, or in any rule, regulation, notice or order promulgated by any officer or agency of the City under authority duly vested in him/her or it, any act is prohibited or is declared to be unlawful or an offense or the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful or an offense, and no specific penalty is provided for the violation of any such provision of this code or any such ordinance, rule, regulation, notice or order, the violator shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the City or County Jail not exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and punishment; provided that in any case wherein the City and State have a penalty for the same offense, the statutory penalty shall apply, except that imprisonments, when made under city ordinances, may be in the city prison or workhouse, instead of the county jail.
B) Every Day a Violation. Every day any violation of this code or any other ordinance or any such rule, regulation, notice or order shall continue shall constitute a separate offense.
C) Responsibility. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, by an amendment thereof, or by any rule or regulation adopted thereunder, such prohibition shall extend to and include the causing, securing, aiding, or abetting of another person to do said act. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, an attempt to do the act is likewise prohibited.
Section 110.060 Mayor Duties
Power to Enforce Laws
The Mayor shall be active and vigilant in enforcing all laws and this code or other ordinances for the government of the city, and he/she shall cause all subordinate officers to be dealt with promptly for any neglect or violation of duty; and he/she is hereby authorized to call on every male inhabitant of the city over eighteen (18) years of age and under fifty (50) to aid in enforcing the laws.
Section 115.040 Officers Oath Bond
Every Officer of the City and his/her assistants, and every Alderman, before entering upon the duties of his/her office, shall take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation before some court of record in the county, or the City Clerk, that he/she possesses all the qualifications prescribed for his/her office by law; that he/she will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Missouri, the provisions of all laws of this State, and the ordinances of the City, and faithfully demean himself/herself while in office; which official oath or affirmation shall be filed with the City Clerk. Every officer of the corporation, when required by law or ordinance, shall, within fifteen (15) days after his/her appointment or election, and before entering upon the discharge of the duties of his/her office, give bond to the city in such sum and with such sureties as may be designated by ordinance, conditioned upon the faithful performance of his/her duty, and that he/she will pay over all monies belonging to the city, as provided by law, that may come into his/her hands. If any person elected or appointed to any office shall fail to take and subscribe such oath or affirmation, or to give bond as herein required, his/her office shall be deemed vacant. For any breach of condition of any such bond, suit may be instituted thereon by the City, or by any person in the name of the City to the use of such person.
Section 135.010 Violations Heard and Determined
Pursuant to section 479.040., 1986, violations of municipal ordinances shall be heard and determined by the Associate Circuit Judge of Dallas County, Missouri.
Buffalo City Council Meeting September 10th 2012
My comments are in red.
Alderman Horn: "I have a question Debby, about your report. It's about the new activities, I'm going to read it so everyone sitting here can see what I see. "Attached is a new ordinance to change the ordinance section to how it is done. Please let me know if anything needs changed as I would like it approved by the September 24th meeting."
I was brought into the mayors office before this meeting, and chastised for my opinions regarding this. (Mayor Mead said if I would have called him, he would have explained this ordinance was only to enable us to be able to pass the budget. He also stated he was just trying to save me from myself.... What has disabled the council from passing the budget in the past that it needed changing now? And why bother changing it now if the ordinance hasn't been followed for 19 years? I believe everything that goes on with our city council should be public knowledge, we should obey the ordinances and strive for transparency. That is all I'm trying to do. I don't need saving.)
I just want to make it public that the budget ordinance that we have currently, is not being followed. We have in our administration report, she has submitted a new proposal. (Ordinance Section 110.250 outlines the proper procedure for introducing an ordinance. You can find that at the bottom of this posting)
I don't know if anyone would like to see what the new proposal is, but it is not the same as our current budget ordinance. It changes quite a few things to give quite a bit of responsibility to two people, the mayor and our city administrator. Did anyone else on the council notice this at all?"
Alderman Stafford: "I had no problems with it. I noticed it but had no problems with it."
Mayor Mead: "You'd asked a question and I'd like Debby (City Administrator) to respond to that, regarding we're not following our ordinances as currently written."
City Administrator: "This is the way that it's been done for the last 19 years. So this is the way the board's been doing it. The board's never come up with the revenue estimates, the board has never put the preliminary data together, the board has never contacted the department heads and asked them to give their estimates for the year. I've always put the preliminary budget together, then we start having budget meetings with, at one point there was a budget committee but now it's the whole council and then you guys decide what you want put in the budget. (This could be why the budgets are so confusing. The board of alderman needs to be more involved. I believe that is why the current ordinance is written the way it is. I think the city administrator is essential in performing these tasks but the council should be involved in the process and have access to all of this information)
This was not supposed to be me putting the budget together this was what I do now. (What she does now is she puts the budget together.)
I did check with three other cities and the three other cities all do it, have a person in that spot. They all have a budget calendar just like ours. Ozark has their budget officer named which is their city administrator. Fairgrove has their city clerk named first in all of those. Camdenton has a budget officer which is defined as a finance person, the mayor and the city clerk. So I didn't think there was anything out of line. (The point is we're not following the ordinance. If these other cities have this process as their current ordinance they're complying with an existing law. My point is we are not.)
I was just trying to fix an ordinance and the only reason it even came up is I brought it to Andrew's (Mayor Mead) attention that the number six in the previous ordinance said that it had to be adopted at the regular meeting in September and we didn't have it ready to adopt. In the 19 years I've been here we've had it adopted one time at the regular meeting in September. So that is what we were actually trying to fix. I was just trying to fix the rest of it to how we actually do it." (Why not fix how we actually do it to what the ordinance says? Number 6 of Section 145.060 says "The budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen at the regular meeting in September." I don't see anything to say it has to be approved at that time. However, the new proposed ordinance does have that language in there. So when the mayor and city administrator imply we have to pass this ordinance because it says we have to adopt the budget at this time that is incorrect... The current ordinance does not have that requirement.)
Alderman Horn: "Well I'm new and when I was sworn in, I was sworn to uphold the ordinances of the city of Buffalo and I've made every effort to try to get to know these ordinances. I'm not an expert but I do believe that everyone else on this council took the same oath that I took. This is not the only ordinance we're not following. No offense Debby but you don't have the authority to propose an ordinance. (Once again see Section 110.250 for the procedure to introduce an ordinance.)
There's a proper procedure in that one of the alderman are supposed to submit it to our city attorney and then it's supposed to be presented to the council. We're not doing these things correctly because we're not abiding by our city ordinances. We're not going to them and trying to figure out what they say. We're just doing whatever we want to do and I don't think that's right."
City Administrator: "There was no disrespect intended Kristie (Alderman Horn), I was doing things the way we've always done them." (We should be obeying the law.)
Alderman Rieschel: "Let me comment on this. If Donald Duck wants to propose an ordinance to this council he can do it. We'll look over that ordinance, and we'll vote on it. I guarantee the senate of the United States does not write our Federal laws, neither does the state. I was on the school board for six years. It was done pretty much the same way it's done. I think it's nitpicking to come in here, we're trying to conduct business. Debby (City Administrator) does a good job, she's done it a long time and it's absolutely ridiculous to come in here and question it. I'm not going to vote for that ordinance. I've written one ordinance this year and if I like Debby's ordinance, that's fine. As far as I'm concerned keep doing it exactly the way you're doing it. And I don't like your reference to my oath of office. I take it very very seriously and that's another example of nitpicking and you need to quit doing it."
Alderman Horn: "I'm not trying to nitpick. I just, as an average citizen, I am a citizen in the city of Buffalo and I care about the integrity of everyone sitting up here. I think we should all take this more seriously."
Mayor Mead: "Miss Horn and I'll ask you, you stated that our ordinances require our alderman to prepare the budget correct?"
Alderman Horn: "It does."
Mayor Mead: "And that our board has to approve it by the first regular meeting in September. Is that correct?"
Alderman Horn: "That's what it says."
Mayor Mead: "Have you done anything to prepare our budget? Do you have a budget ready prepared to present to the board for us to vote on this evening?"
Alderman Horn: "We're supposed to do that together and this is something that was just brought to my attention."
Mayor Mead: "Have you done anything?"
Alderman Horn: "Yes, I've attended every meeting and I've tried diligently to read the ordinances and understand them because I believe that this is what's supposed to be our guide. Not just what we think. There's laws theres a reason for laws. We should follow them." (I've also tried very hard to ask questions at meetings regarding the budget. I've asked for help from professionals who are experienced in budgeting. Everyone is as confused as I am by what's been presented.)
Mayor Mead: "Do you think it would be wise to tailor our laws to mirror what we're doing to what's efficient and what's been effective or do you have a budget to present for passage this evening?"
Alderman Horn: "That's not my responsibility. That's the councils responsibility. As a whole it is our responsibility."
Mayor Mead: "Have you done anything above and beyond what the other five alderman have done?"
Alderman Horn: "I'm not insinuating that I have. I am just stating and bringing it to the boards attention that we are not following the city ordinances."
Mayor Mead: "Ok. Again would it be out of line to propose and ordinance that would make it easier for us to get our budget passed?"
Alderman Horn: "It would but we need to follow the ordinances until such time as we change them. We can't do as we please and then change it to suit us that's wrong. We would be outraged if our Federal government were doing this. I am outraged I think this is not the way things should be done."
Mayor Mead: "Any other questions regarding administration? Any other comments by our administration?"
Section 110.250 Procedure as to Ordinances, Resolutions, ETC.
All ordinances and resolutions shall be introduced to the Board of Aldermen in written form with the name of the Alderman introducing the same endorsed thereon. All proposed ordinances shall be prepared by the City Attorney or bear his/her certification that they are in correct form. A copy thereof shall be sent to each member of the Board of Aldermen in advance of the meeting, to which copy shall be attached a brief resume of the bill together with the reasons for introduction thereof (as prepared by the proponent thereof), and if any amendment of an existing ordinance is proposed, the nature of the change sought to be made. Failure to follow the procedure shall not invalidate any ordinance or resolution adopted by the Board of Alderman.
Article III. Penalties
Section 100.200: General Penalty
A) Whenever in this Code or other ordinance of the city, or in any rule, regulation, notice or order promulgated by any officer or agency of the City under authority duly vested in him/her or it, any act is prohibited or is declared to be unlawful or an offense or the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful or an offense, and no specific penalty is provided for the violation of any such provision of this code or any such ordinance, rule, regulation, notice or order, the violator shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the City or County Jail not exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and punishment; provided that in any case wherein the City and State have a penalty for the same offense, the statutory penalty shall apply, except that imprisonments, when made under city ordinances, may be in the city prison or workhouse, instead of the county jail.
B) Every Day a Violation. Every day any violation of this code or any other ordinance or any such rule, regulation, notice or order shall continue shall constitute a separate offense.
C) Responsibility. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, by an amendment thereof, or by any rule or regulation adopted thereunder, such prohibition shall extend to and include the causing, securing, aiding, or abetting of another person to do said act. Whenever any act is prohibited by this code, an attempt to do the act is likewise prohibited.
Section 110.060 Mayor Duties
Power to Enforce Laws
The Mayor shall be active and vigilant in enforcing all laws and this code or other ordinances for the government of the city, and he/she shall cause all subordinate officers to be dealt with promptly for any neglect or violation of duty; and he/she is hereby authorized to call on every male inhabitant of the city over eighteen (18) years of age and under fifty (50) to aid in enforcing the laws.
Section 115.040 Officers Oath Bond
Every Officer of the City and his/her assistants, and every Alderman, before entering upon the duties of his/her office, shall take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation before some court of record in the county, or the City Clerk, that he/she possesses all the qualifications prescribed for his/her office by law; that he/she will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Missouri, the provisions of all laws of this State, and the ordinances of the City, and faithfully demean himself/herself while in office; which official oath or affirmation shall be filed with the City Clerk. Every officer of the corporation, when required by law or ordinance, shall, within fifteen (15) days after his/her appointment or election, and before entering upon the discharge of the duties of his/her office, give bond to the city in such sum and with such sureties as may be designated by ordinance, conditioned upon the faithful performance of his/her duty, and that he/she will pay over all monies belonging to the city, as provided by law, that may come into his/her hands. If any person elected or appointed to any office shall fail to take and subscribe such oath or affirmation, or to give bond as herein required, his/her office shall be deemed vacant. For any breach of condition of any such bond, suit may be instituted thereon by the City, or by any person in the name of the City to the use of such person.
Section 135.010 Violations Heard and Determined
Pursuant to section 479.040., 1986, violations of municipal ordinances shall be heard and determined by the Associate Circuit Judge of Dallas County, Missouri.
Friday, September 7, 2012
Budget Ordinance Change Proposed By Mayors Assistant???
On Monday September 10th, 2012, the Buffalo Missouri Board of Alderman will be presented with an ordinance proposed by the Administrative Assistant to the Mayor. In her monthly Administration Report she states, "Attached is a new ordinance to change the budget section to how it is done. Please let me know if anything needs changed, as I would like to have it approved at the September 24th meeting."
I have a few problems with this...
Section 110.250: Of the City of Buffalo Code Book States...
PROCEDURE AS TO ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ETC.
All ordinances and resolutions shall be introduced to the Board of Aldermen in written form with the name of the Alderman introducing the same endorsed thereon. All proposed ordinances shall be prepared by the City Attorney or bear his/her certification that they are in correct form. A copy thereof shall be sent to each member of the Board of Aldermen in advance of the meeting, to which copy shall be attached a brief resume of the bill together with the reasons for introduction thereof (as prepared by the proponent thereof), and if any amendment of an existing ordinance is proposed, the nature of the change sought to be made. Failure to follow the procedure shall not invalidate any ordinance or resolution adopted by the Board of Aldermen.
I don't see anywhere in this ordinance that states the Administrative Assistant to the Mayor has authority to propose an ordinance. I also want to point out the ordinance states all proposed ordinances shall be prepared by the City Attorney...
Now on to the "proposed" ordinance... My comments will be included in red.
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 145.060 RELATED TO BUDGET CALENDAR AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 145.060 RELATED TO THE SAME
WHEREAS, It has been found and determined by the Board of Alderman they should modify budget section of City Code to be concurrent with calendar that is in practice. I don't believe I missed a meeting but I don't recall it ever being found and determined by the Board of Alderman that we should modify the budget section of the city code. Maybe that means it will be decided if we enact this ordinance? NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN OF THE CITY OF BUFFALO, MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Repeal. Section 145.060 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Buffalo and all amendments thereto are hereby repealed. The code to be repealed says the following...
Section 145.060 BUDGET CALENDAR The Board of Aldermen shall prepare the City Budget in accordance with the following calendar:
1. First, the Board of Aldermen will collect the data necessary and make preliminary revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year. They will estimate expenditures for the present year, and note expenditures and revenues for the previous two (2) fiscal years.
2. Second, the Board of Aldermen will request from each City Officer a statement of expenditures requested for the coming fiscal year.
3. Third, the City Board will review the departmental requests and make their final revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year, and will confer with department heads to discuss these requests.
4. Fourth, the Board of Aldermen will begin assembling the City Budget.
5. Fifth, the Board of Aldermen will confer with the Mayor and any such other officers as the Mayor may designate, for preparation of the City Budget for the next fiscal year to be submitted to the Board of Alderman.
6. The budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen at the regular meeting in September.
Section 2. Enactment. There is hereby enacted the following ordinance to be known as Section 145.060 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Buffalo read as follows:
SECTION 145.060 BUDGET CALENDAR
The Administrative Assistant in consultation with the Mayor shall prepare the City Budget in accordance with the following calendar. Notice please that this proposed ordinance, that was submitted by the Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, will exclude the 6 City Alderman from preparing the City Budget. Are you taxpayers comfortable with 2 people having the authority to decide how our tax dollars are spent???
1. In July of each year, the Administrative Assistant will request from each Department Head a statement of expenditures requested for the coming fiscal year.
2. The Administrative Assistant will collect the data necessary, and make preliminary revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year.
3. The Administrative Assistant will review the departmental requests and make their final revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year, and will confer with department heads to discuss these requests.
4. The Administrative Assistant shall prepare a preliminary budget based on the revenue estimates calculated and department head expenditure requests. Please notice that in the current code each of these tasks are delegated to the Board of Alderman to carry out... One through four will now be the sole discretion of the Administrative Assistant...
5. The Board of Alderman will meet to discuss the preliminary budget and meet with such department heads as they see fit before approving the final budget for the next fiscal year. I speak from experience when I say, it is already confusing enough for the City Alderman with the current accounting methods being used. Notice this ordinance turns over a lot of control to ONE PERSON. Is that good government???
6. The final budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen and approved prior to the end of September. With the current system it is very difficult to understand the budget. Cutting the Aldermen out of the process is only going to make things harder.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect beginning with the next succeeding term of the Mayor's office and at the time, all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith shall hereby be repealed.
Ok no more red font. Whether you are a citizen of the city of Buffalo or not I value your opinion on this matter. I believe there is wisdom in a multitude of counselors. I am sincerely asking for input from the citizens I represent but if they will not give it... I will take what I can get. What are your thoughts?
I have a few problems with this...
Section 110.250: Of the City of Buffalo Code Book States...
PROCEDURE AS TO ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ETC.
All ordinances and resolutions shall be introduced to the Board of Aldermen in written form with the name of the Alderman introducing the same endorsed thereon. All proposed ordinances shall be prepared by the City Attorney or bear his/her certification that they are in correct form. A copy thereof shall be sent to each member of the Board of Aldermen in advance of the meeting, to which copy shall be attached a brief resume of the bill together with the reasons for introduction thereof (as prepared by the proponent thereof), and if any amendment of an existing ordinance is proposed, the nature of the change sought to be made. Failure to follow the procedure shall not invalidate any ordinance or resolution adopted by the Board of Aldermen.
I don't see anywhere in this ordinance that states the Administrative Assistant to the Mayor has authority to propose an ordinance. I also want to point out the ordinance states all proposed ordinances shall be prepared by the City Attorney...
Now on to the "proposed" ordinance... My comments will be included in red.
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 145.060 RELATED TO BUDGET CALENDAR AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 145.060 RELATED TO THE SAME
WHEREAS, It has been found and determined by the Board of Alderman they should modify budget section of City Code to be concurrent with calendar that is in practice. I don't believe I missed a meeting but I don't recall it ever being found and determined by the Board of Alderman that we should modify the budget section of the city code. Maybe that means it will be decided if we enact this ordinance? NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN OF THE CITY OF BUFFALO, MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Repeal. Section 145.060 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Buffalo and all amendments thereto are hereby repealed. The code to be repealed says the following...
Section 145.060 BUDGET CALENDAR The Board of Aldermen shall prepare the City Budget in accordance with the following calendar:
1. First, the Board of Aldermen will collect the data necessary and make preliminary revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year. They will estimate expenditures for the present year, and note expenditures and revenues for the previous two (2) fiscal years.
2. Second, the Board of Aldermen will request from each City Officer a statement of expenditures requested for the coming fiscal year.
3. Third, the City Board will review the departmental requests and make their final revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year, and will confer with department heads to discuss these requests.
4. Fourth, the Board of Aldermen will begin assembling the City Budget.
5. Fifth, the Board of Aldermen will confer with the Mayor and any such other officers as the Mayor may designate, for preparation of the City Budget for the next fiscal year to be submitted to the Board of Alderman.
6. The budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen at the regular meeting in September.
Section 2. Enactment. There is hereby enacted the following ordinance to be known as Section 145.060 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Buffalo read as follows:
SECTION 145.060 BUDGET CALENDAR
The Administrative Assistant in consultation with the Mayor shall prepare the City Budget in accordance with the following calendar. Notice please that this proposed ordinance, that was submitted by the Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, will exclude the 6 City Alderman from preparing the City Budget. Are you taxpayers comfortable with 2 people having the authority to decide how our tax dollars are spent???
1. In July of each year, the Administrative Assistant will request from each Department Head a statement of expenditures requested for the coming fiscal year.
2. The Administrative Assistant will collect the data necessary, and make preliminary revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year.
3. The Administrative Assistant will review the departmental requests and make their final revenue estimates for the coming fiscal year, and will confer with department heads to discuss these requests.
4. The Administrative Assistant shall prepare a preliminary budget based on the revenue estimates calculated and department head expenditure requests. Please notice that in the current code each of these tasks are delegated to the Board of Alderman to carry out... One through four will now be the sole discretion of the Administrative Assistant...
5. The Board of Alderman will meet to discuss the preliminary budget and meet with such department heads as they see fit before approving the final budget for the next fiscal year. I speak from experience when I say, it is already confusing enough for the City Alderman with the current accounting methods being used. Notice this ordinance turns over a lot of control to ONE PERSON. Is that good government???
6. The final budget shall be submitted to the Board of Aldermen and approved prior to the end of September. With the current system it is very difficult to understand the budget. Cutting the Aldermen out of the process is only going to make things harder.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect beginning with the next succeeding term of the Mayor's office and at the time, all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith shall hereby be repealed.
Ok no more red font. Whether you are a citizen of the city of Buffalo or not I value your opinion on this matter. I believe there is wisdom in a multitude of counselors. I am sincerely asking for input from the citizens I represent but if they will not give it... I will take what I can get. What are your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)