Paper Radio

Budget in Administration Hands

All three political parties on Ann Arbor City Council have released their budget proposals for 1975-76, but it appears to have been an academic exercise. Under the City Charter, seven votes (out of eleven) would be required to amend City Administrator Sylvester Murray's proposed budget. This puts the five-member Republican bloc on Council in a position to nix any significant changes sought by the five Democratic and one Human Rights Party council people. 

In past years, a majority of less than seven has occasionally been able to alter the budget by taking informal "straw votes" on motions instructing the City Administrator to change his budget proposal. In this way, HRP and the Democrats were able to obtain some funding for human service programs in the 1972-73 City budget when they last had a combined six vote majority on Council.

At that time, Republican members of the Council brought suit against the action of the Council majority, and that legal challenge terminated only because of the death of the judge handling the case. This year, if Democrats and HRP attempt such an action, the GOP is threatening a suit and more.

"I would not only go to court, I would institute a recall campaign against those involved," Fifth Ward Republican Louis Belcher stated angrily during a May 19 press conference. His position was echoed by other Republicans present.

In any event, it appears doubtful that Council Democrats and HRP's Kathy Kozachenko will be able to agree on a compromise amended budget before the Council must adopt a budget on May 27. This is primarily because of the delay in certification of Democratic Mayor Albert Wheeler, which paralyzed the City Council for three weeks during the period when it normally begins the budget review process. Also, Democrats were initially holding out hope of receiving some Republican support for their budget changes and didn't place enough priority on initiating negotiations with HRP.

The Democratic Party budget proposal, publically issued on May 16, calls for revisions totaling $490,000 in the Administrator's budget. The proposal would eliminate many of the lay-offs and job closings contained in Administrator Murray's budget, and increase staffing in the city's housing inspection bureau and Parks Department. The Democratic budget would also provide $100,000 for maintenance projects on Ellsworth Road, $25,000 for the city's anti-rape program, $12,000 for additional school crossing guards, and $12,000 for subsidies for low-income young people. In addition, it would create a much-needed city Department of Human Services.

In order to fund these programs, the Democratic budget would make an across-the-board 3 percent cut in most City Hall departments. It would also freeze all non-union salaries over $18,000 and eliminate one of two assistant city administrators and the position of assistant housing director in the Building and Safety Department (now vacant).

The Democratic budget echoes in a milder form many of the recommendations made earlier by Second Ward HRP Councilwoman Kathy Kozachenko in her budget proposal made public May 5. That plan called for the elimination of some 25 administrative and supervisory positions which Kozachenko termed "was wasteful and unnecessary." Through cuts in executive positions and salaries, as well as reduced overtime, consulting fees, and other non-personnel expenses, the HRP budget provided several hundred thousand dollars for human service programs such as daycare, health care, and legal services. The HRP budget would also halt planned layoffs of some 19 lower-level city employees, and expand the operations of the Human Rights Department, the Fire Department, and the city's Housing Inspection program.

Predictably, the GOP's position on the budget, issued May 19, stressed funding for the Police Department, although it contained some areas of agreement with the other two parties. The Republican budget would provide for seven additional police officers, although they are quick to point out that this merely stops some planned police layoffs and isn't a net increase in the size of the force. The GOP budget also provides for three additional firefighters and increased funding for the Parks Department and the Fifteenth District Court.

These news expenditures are accommodated in the Republican's budget plan $160,000 cut from other departments transfers of $122,000 from a federal Community Development Revenue Sharing (CRDS) grant to the general fund. According to guidelines established by Congress, CRDS funds are intended to serve the needs of low and moderate-income people, and there is a serious question as to whether the GOP's proposal would be a permissible use of the grant. 

Although no party is expected to gather the necessary votes to pass its budget amendment proposal, some of the features of the three parties' recommendations may find their way into the final budget. City Administrator Murray has stated his intention to review the three plans and consult with his department heads about possibly implementing some of the proposed changes.

"I will not accept in tot the changes proposed by any one of the parties," he cautioned.

One major lesson which should be learned from this year's budget-making process is that the structure of City Hall, the provisions of the City Charter, and the timing of the budget adoption all combine to give the newly elected City Council only limited voice in setting spending priorities. In the absence of Council input into the writing of the City's budget (or a seven vote majority), the appointed Administrator has a virtually free hand in establishing city financial policy. Candidates for local office can present proposals for changing spending priorities, but once elected they will face great difficulties in bringing them about, even with the support of a majority of their colleagues.