MAYORS CHIEF OF STAFF DISAPPOINTED IN JOHN FRIENDS BUDGET VOTE DECISION WITHOUT ATTENDING BUDGET MEETINGS

15

Councilman Friend,

It is disappointing that you have made your budget vote decision without having attended both of the meetings set up for council leadership to discuss the 2016 budget with Mayor Winnecke. As the budget vote is currently scheduled for Monday, the Administration is certainly willing to sit down and discuss your recommended cuts or additional budget adjustments.

Please let us know if you would like for our office to set up another meeting.

Steve Schaefer
Mayor Winnecke Chief Of Staff

ATTACHED IS AN E-MAIL THAT CITY COUNCILMAN JOHN FRIEND SENT CITY CONTROLLER RUSS LLOYD JR CONCERNING THE ADMINISTRATION BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS BEING LOWER BY $3 MILLION THAT THE MAYORS CHIEF OF STAFF STEVE SCHAEFER MADE REFERENCE TO.

Dear Russ,
Thank you for the attached information. In review of the data, the General Fund adjustment of 1.5 m will not bring the fund into a balanced budget. Based on the actuals of 2014 and projections of 2015 and not withstanding the fact that the PILOT revenue increase costing the Water Utility Ratepayer (80%) is not justifiable . .just a backhanded way of increasing taxes . . is out of balance by 6.5 m. For the year ending July 31, 2015, the administration’s General Fund cash balance declined by 6 m during the period . .Park declined by 1.1 m . . .Downtown TIF declined by 3 m and the remainder of the operational funds declined by 3 m totaling nearly 13 m decline in operational fund cash. In review that the administration is reducing their original budget by 3 m, an additional reduction of 7 m is needed.

The days of phase in are over based on the alarming declines in operational funds as illustrated by the fiscal year ending July 31, 2015 cash balances in operations. Regrettably, last year I was persuaded to support the 4.9 m cuts knowing that the number was 12 m which is supported by the July 31, 2015 fiscal year results. When Mayor Winnecke took over the financial well- being of our City, the total Civil City fund balances were 118 m and at the end of 2014, the total fund balances are 71 m a decline of 47 m. This is verifiable on the Indiana Gateway website. What also give me mega heartburn is the fact that there are 550 cities and towns in Indiana and according to the Department of Local Government Finance (Also obtainable on the Indiana Gateway website) the average cost of municipal operations is $853 per citizen while Evansville is $1,877 per citizen. Out of 550 cities we rank in the lower 8 percentile.

In other words, we have 510 cities operating at lower costs then Evansville. If the average is $853 per citizens and we are at $1,877, a difference of $1,024 times 120,000 people = $12.3 million. Oddly enough, the approximate figure of the overall decline in operational funds for the year ended July 31, 2015.

The Administration is virtually spending every last dime of revenue this city expects to receive and then some. The administration has not allowed for any reserves and unlike some cities, Evansville does not have an ordinance requiring the establishment of any reserve within any particular fund which is unwise and foolish. Unfortunately, I will not be persuaded to support the revised budget and unlike some individuals on Council of which one is a republican and assume he has been in counsel with the administration, are floating the balloon to increase income taxes by 25%, this I will not support as well. If the cost of operating government equaled that of Indianapolis, Ft. Wayne and South Bend and we had implemented a spending plan as strongly suggested by Dan Hadden of Umbaugh in July of 2014, but still fell short maybe just maybe I would entertain the notion of an income tax increase. If tax and spend is the order of the day, count me out.

Russ, I appreciate your service and efforts in this budget process. Of course, my door is open for suggestions.

Respectfully,

John Friend

5th Ward City Councilman

Please take time and vote in today’s “Readers Poll”. Don’t miss reading today’s Feature articles because they are always an interesting read. Please scroll at the bottom of our paper so you can enjoy our creative political cartoons. Copyright 2015 City County Observer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without our permission.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

15 COMMENTS

  2. CCO: is it possible to obtain a less cheesy picture of Hit Man Schaefer ? Pretty much ruined my morning routine looking at this grinning goofball . . . .

  3. I think Friend was running late to his Mensa and Anger Management meetings, couldn’t make it.

    Schaefer must think he is clever. The reason they put the proposed budget in WRITING is so that each councilman doesn’t have to go to 3rd Floor and kiss the ring.

    Go Friend, O’Daniel, Big Al and SBR. Make them keep chopping.

    • No doubt. I think if John Friend could ever succinctly and simply express himself, he would be dangerous. He definitely knows what he’s talking about, but he has no idea how to put it into words for the rest of us.

    • Is it true that DMD wanted to sponsor classes on how to cry for the men so they would be able to make a more persuasive argument, like in Saudi Arabia, when they go to kneel and kiss the ring?

  4. As a young lady visitor to there I addressed that Schaefer guy to our group as a typical male pig, himself and that sinking weaver plug play in on the same plane of events. I’m stating they are both over bearing male pigs, we trend to believe that’s what most women see. You people need to lose them, they’re both a couple of conceited pigs.

  5. I doubt that any last minute pleadings on the part of Mayor Winnecke would change the mind of any fiscally responsible Common Council member. The proposed budget needs some very serious trimming, and if the mayor does not understand that, then he certainly must no be returned to his job as mayor!

  6. Tired of two parties that consistently produce candidates owned by the wealthy chamber types? There is a third option:

    Write-In Candidates

    Another manner of candidate nomination is as write-in candidate. This method allows a person to run for office without filing as a major party candidate, being nominated at a town convention, or by a petition of nomination. To be eligible, a candidate must file a DECLARATION OF INTENT TO BE A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR CITY OR TOWN OFFICE IN 2015 with the circuit court clerk. (IC 3-8-2-2.5) (see Appendix
    STATE FORM CAN-51)

    Once filed, a write-in candidate is subject to the same laws that apply to other candidates. However, unlike all other candidates, the write-in candidate’s name will not appear on the ballot. Instead, a voter must write the name of the candidate on the ballot in the space provided for write-in votes. Only votes cast for declared write-in candidates shall be counted and certified. (IC 3-12-1-1.7)

    Candidates can file a DECLARATION OF INTENT TO BE A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR A CITY OR TOWN OFFICE IN 2015 between January 7, 2015 and noon, July 6, 2015. (IC 3-8-2-4(b)) A write-in candidate may voluntarily withdraw a previously filed DECLARATION OF INTENT TO BE A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR A CITY OR TOWN OFFICE IN 2015 by filing a MUNICIPAL ELECTION CANDIDATE WITHDRAWAL IN 2015 no later than noon, July 15, 2015. (IC 3-8-2-2.7) (see Appendix STATE FORM CAN-46)

    * * * * * * * * *

    Too late for this year’s mayoral election, but mark it well for all future elections.

  7. I have been trying to follow the funding for fighting blight and the cities proposed $2.3 million use of riverboat fund for expanding the unneeded Brownfields land bank. The mayor cut the funding request to $700k. I asked the city for a break down on how the $700k would be spent and this is the reply.

    “The riverboat dollars, in whatever amount Council appropriates for the project, would be exclusively for property expenses.

    Thanks.”

    They are requesting a gift to the Brownfields with no accountability, no plan, and no deliverable services. I hate to say this but – any council member that would approve this in its current state is either just plain stupid or is trading gifts.

    No reason to consider a budget if the proposal is full of shxx like this.

    • @George,

      Hi George, lots of puffery in the C & P about the $ 2.3 Million and how it was going to be better than the thing which slices bread . . .but never heard that it had been cutback. Was I in a coma, or can you
      tell me when the Mayor punted (shanked it) ?

      • Information was shared with me by SBR in email. She was still trying to promote it as a good thing. Just like the CCO pol shows, people I talk to say cut the funding for land banking and put everything in demo to get caught up. What I was understanding SBR to say was that $700k wouldn’t take down enough houses. Well if that money was put in the demolition fund of the city it could take down as many as promised with the 2.3 million land bank. Now if that $700k is just a gift to Brownfields it might take down a couple around haneys corner but most will likely go to administration and mowing grass.

  8. A vote for Whiney is a vote to torture ourselves with this steaming pile of manure for 4 more years. We’ll be keeping Russ and KC and the rest of the No Sunshine Band, too. That alone is reason enough to vote the Whiner out!

    • Not so, LKB. This is not a choice between good or bad. This is a choice between bad or worse. Do you actually think Riecken will be more fiscally responsible, spend less?

      • I’d rather have bad than worse and I believe our current accidental Mayor is worse.

Comments are closed.