| 11/23/1998 | 0 |
MAYOR
| RETURNED NOT SIGNED
Minutes note: November 20, 1998
To The Honorable
Common Council of the
City of Milwaukee
Honorable Members of the Common Council:
The budget that you adopted on November 13th will lower Milwaukee's tax rate in 1999 by 28 cents, the city's eleventh consecutive year of tax rate reduction. I thank you for your careful consideration and thoughtful action on the city's 1999 spending plan.
However, despite the drop in the tax rate, the budget that you approved will increase the overall cost of running city government. Tax levy-supported spending authority in the budget adopted by the Common Council would increase by more than $13.6 million over the amount I proposed back in September, "growing" government more than the projected rate of inflation and raising costs of city services for every Milwaukee taxpayer. If left unchanged, the 1999 Budget as adopted by the Council would break the city's 11-year history of preparing budgets that limit spending increases to the projected rate of inflation.
The proposed budget for 1999 held a tight line on city spending, requiring you to make a number of hard choices. I commend your efforts under difficult circumstances to make the right choices for Milwaukee's residents. However, I believe now, as I did in September, that we must remain cautious against an uncertain fiscal future.
Just over one year ago, in the face of a potential $20+ million annual bill from pension-related lawsuits, we implemented a freeze on hiring of city employees. During the past year we have worked together to make the freeze work, leaving less critical positions vacant while filling jobs essential to effective delivery of important city services. With the help of dedicated employees throughout city government, our efforts have begun to pay off. Over the past year the hiring freeze has saved the city an estimated $5.1 million.
These on-going problems will require that we continue to make tough choices and difficult decisions. We must ensure that the city can continue to provide important services to its residents. However, we must also exercise vigilance to protect those same residents from the potential costs of these destructive lawsuits.
We can accomplish both of these goals only by continuing to work together to control city spending. Now, more than ever, we must seek ways to save money by providing services more efficiently and more effectively.
I ask you to take a small step in that direction - toward securing Milwaukee's future - by carefully considering the vetoes that follow. They will again require you to make difficult decisions. However, I seek your support in sustaining these few vetoes and, where appropriate, request your support for the related substitute actions.
Thank you for your continued support and your careful consideration.
Veto of Common Council Amendment #40
To Restore the Asbestos Program to the Health Department
I am vetoing the portion of Common Council Amendment #40 that transfers the Asbestos Program from the Department of Neighborhood Services to the Health Department.
The new Department of Neighborhood Services (DNS) will conduct inspections of buildings where demolition and renovation activities take place. The department will also inspect and identify buildings that require repair or demolition. These types of projects frequently involve identification and removal of asbestos hazards.
Having the asbestos inspectors in the same department with other building inspectors who routinely work on projects involving asbestos abatement will improve and enhance communication between inspectors and allow for a more timely response when problems are detected. The city's asbestos abatement efforts will prove far more effective if these two inspection operations work together rather than separately.
DNS construction inspectors have received asbestos certification training. They can provide valuable support to integrated asbestos inspection efforts. Centralizing asbestos inspection services in a single area is consistent with prior efforts to consolidate and facilitate neighborhood development activities. This consolidation will also strengthen the ties between asbestos removal and enforcement and permitting activities.
As a result of the city's emphasis on neighborhood redevelopment, especially in older sections of the city where asbestos substances are commonly found, placing the asbestos program in the Department of Neighborhood Services is good policy. Moreover, the enhanced cooperation between building and asbestos inspectors will allow for more proactive efforts in revitalizing our city's neighborhoods.
I ask that you sustain my veto.
Veto of Common Council Amendment #45
Restoration of Six Sanitation Supervisors to DPW-Sanitation
I am vetoing Common Council Amendment #45 that restores six Sanitation Supervisor positions to the Sanitation Division of the Department of Public Works.
Over the last several years, the Sanitation Division has implemented a number of efficiency improvements. These improvements have led to a reduction in the number of garbage collection and recycling routes, and as a result, the number of field personnel performing the work. During this same time, however, the number of supervisors overseeing field personnel has remained unchanged. This is a disparity that must be addressed. The 1999 proposed budget attempted to correct this imbalance by reducing the number of Sanitation Supervisors by six positions. The reduction in supervisory positions would bring the management to non-management ratio in the Sanitation Division more closely in line with the remainder of the Department of Public Works.
However, I understand your concerns about the effect of this proposal on individuals currently filling these positions. As a result, I am proposing a substitute action which restores three Sanitation Supervisor positions instead of the six restored in Amendment #45. The Sanitation Division currently has one vacant supervisor position. In addition, two individuals can be accommodated with vacant positions elsewhere in the department at the same level of pay. Therefore, this substitute action would eliminate the need for layoffs or salary reductions for individual employees affected by this change.
Based on the above reasons, I ask that you sustain my veto.
Veto of Items Contained in Common Council Amendment #47
Capital Improvements - Department of City Development - Tax Incremental Districts
I am vetoing Common Council Amendment #47 that provides $10.3 million in General Obligation Borrowing for unspecified TID projects. The intent of this amendment was to provide the city with $20 million in unallocated TID borrowing authority in the event that an unanticipated redevelopment project was proposed during 1999.
At present, the city's TID account contains $22.9 million in unutilized borrowing authority. Of this amount, the Comptroller presently estimates that $10.64 million will be used (or borrowed) in December, 1998. Following such a sale, the city would retain $12.26 million in authority which could be used for either existing Tax Incremental Districts or for new districts that the Common Council may create in 1999.
The 1999 Proposed Budget also includes an additional $6.5 million in authority which, when combined with the anticipated carryover of $12.26 million, would leave the city almost $19 million in borrowing authority for various TID projects. Therefore, the addition of $10.3 million in borrowing authority to the Tax Incremental District project account is not necessary at this time.
I also have a concern with the proposed amendment regarding the precedent it sets in allocating large sums of money to unassigned projects. Providing subsidies for projects which have yet to materialize does not make good budgetary sense. It also sends the wrong signal to developers - that Milwaukee has a blank check waiting for them.
I ask that you sustain this veto.
Sincerely,
JOHN O. NORQUIST
Mayor
HEALTH DEPARTMENT/DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES - ASBESTOS PROGRAM
AMENDMENT #40
A. DISAPPROVAL ACTION
The Mayor hereby disapproves of the following budget line(s) in the 1999 Budget: (which were affected by Common Council Amendment #40 that moved two positions of Environmental Hygienist in the asbestos program from the Department of Neighborhood Services to the Health Department).
BMD-2 1999
Page and Positions 1999
Line No. Item Description or Units Amount
SECTION I. A. 1. BUDGETS FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES*
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
CONSUMER PROTECTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DECISION UNIT
240.38-22 Environmental Hygienist (CC) 2 $76,985
240.41-24 O&M FTE'S 45.50 ---
240.44-2 ESTIMATED EMPLOYE FRINGE BENEFITS**--- $614,265
240.44-7 Office Supplies & Materials --- $23,697
240.44-17 Automotive & Construction Equipment --- $54,300
240.45-6 Miscellaneous Services --- $37,382
240.48-7 DIRECT LABOR HOUR ALLOCATION --- 91,900
425.1-3 FRINGE BENEFIT OFFSET --- $-84,759,702
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
265.12-4 O&M FTE'S 179.18 ---
265.14-13 ESTIMATED EMPLOYE FRINGE BENEFITS* --- $2,409,311
265.14-18 Office Supplies & Materials --- $23,637
265.15-3 Automotive & Construction Equipment --- $297,700
265.15-17 Miscellaneous Service --- $157,851
265.17-10 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR HOUR ALLOCATION --- 335,124
HEALTH DEPARTMENT/DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES - ASBESTOS PROGRAM
AMENDMENT #40 (Continued)
In lieu of the above disapproved item, the Mayor recommends adoption of the following substitute action:
B. SUBSTITUTE ACTION
SECTION I. A. 1. BUDGETS FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES*
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
CONSUMER PROTECTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DECISION UNIT
240.41-24 O&M FTE'S 43.50 ---
240.44-2 ESTIMATED EMPLOYE FRINGE BENEFITS** --- $588,090
240.44-7 Office Supplies & Materials --- $21,628
240.44-17 Automotive & Construction Equipment --- $48,070
240.45-6 Miscellaneous Services --- $35,256
240.48-7 DIRECT LABOR HOUR ALLOCATION --- 88,300
SECTION I. A. 1. BUDGETS FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES*
DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
265.8-21 Environmental Hygienist (CC)|99|$76,985
265.12-4 O&M FTE'S 181.18 ---
265.14-13 ESTIMATED EMPLOYE FRINGE BENEFITS* --- $2,435,486
265.14-18 Office Supplies & Materials --- $25,706
265.15-3 Automotive & Construction Equipment --- $303,930
265.15-17 Miscellaneous Service --- $159,977
265.17-10 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR HOUR ALLOCATION --- 338,724
425.1-3 FRINGE BENEFIT OFFEST --- $-84,759,702
C. COMBINED EFFECT OF ACTIONS A & B ABOVE:
1. Budget Effect = $0
2. Levy Effect = $0
3. Rate Effect = $0
DPW SANITATION DIVISION - SANITATION SUPERVISORS
AMENDMENT #45
A. DISAPPROVAL ACTION
The Mayor hereby disapproves of the following budget line(s) in the 1999 Budget: (which were affected by Common Council Amendment #45 that restored six positions of Sanitation Supervisor to DPW Sanitation Division).
BMD-2 1999
Page and Positions 1999
Line No. Item Description or Units Amount
SECTION I. A. 1. BUDGETS FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES*
DPW-SANITATION DIVISION
340.1-23 Sanitation Supervisor 30 $1,420,676
340.3-12 O&M FTE'S 397.23 ---
340.3-26 ESTIMATED EMPLOYE FRINGE BENEFITS* --- $4,948,071
340.9-8 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR HOUR ALLOCATION --- 715,014
425.1-3 FRINGE BENEFIT OFFSET --- $-84,759,702
In lieu of the above disapproved item, the Mayor recommends adoption of the following substitute action:
B. SUBSTITUTE ACTION
SECTION I. A. 1. BUDGETS FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES*
DPW-SANITATION DIVISION
340.1-23 Sanitation Supervisor 27 $1,284,743
340.3-12 O&M FTE'S 394.23 ---
340.3-26 ESTIMATED EMPLOYE FRINGE BENEFITS* --- $4,901,854
340.9-8 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR HOUR ALLOCATION --- 709,614
425.1-3 FRINGE BENEFIT OFFSET --- $-84,713,485
C. COMBINED EFFECT OF ACTIONS A & B ABOVE:
1. Budget Effect = $-135,933
2. Levy Effect = $-135,933
3. Rate Effect = $-.009
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - DEPARTMENT OF CITY DEVELOPMENT -
TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS
AMENDMENT #47
A. DISAPPROVAL ACTION
The Mayor hereby disapproves of the following budget line(s) in the 1999 Budget: (which were affected by Common Council Amendment #47 that added $10.3 million to the Capital Improvements budget for unspecified Tax Incremental District projects).
BMD-2 1999
Page and Positions 1999
Line No. Item Description or Units Amount
SECTION I. C. 1. BUDGETS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
DEPARTMENT OF CITY DEVELOPMENT
"Tax Incremental Financed Urban Renewal
Projects (Purpose Account) Including Grant
Funded Projects (A)"
490.13-9 New Borrowing $16,300,000
SECTION I. C. 2. SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET
Pub. Improvements in Tax Increment
Districts
490.57-22 New Authorizations $16,300,000
SECTION II. PROPOSED BORROWING AUTHORIZATIONS
G. TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS
630.2 2. For providing financial assistance to urban renewal projects
authorized under Section 66.405. $16,300,000
In lieu of the above disapproved item, the Mayor recommends adoption of the following substitute action:
B. SUBSTITUTE ACTION
SECTION I. C. 1. BUDGETS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
DEPARTMENT OF CITY DEVELOPMENT
"Tax Incremental Financed Urban Renewal
Projects (Purpose Account) Including Grant
Funded Projects (A)"
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - DEPARTMENT OF CITY DEVELOPMENT -
TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS
AMENDMENT #47 (Continued)
490.13-9 New Borrowing $6,500,000
SECTION I. C. 2. SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET
Pub. Improvements in Tax Increment
Districts
490.57-22 New Authorizations $6,500,000
SECTION II. PROPOSED BORROWING AUTHORIZATIONS
G. TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS
630.2 2. For providing financial assistance to urban renewal projects
authorized under Section 66.405. $6,500,000
C. COMBINED EFFECT OF ACTIONS A & B ABOVE:
1. Budget Effect = $-9,800,000
2. Levy Effect = $0
3. Rate Effect = $-0.000 | | |
Action details
|
Meeting details
|
Not available
|