After the break, some other ideas that might help the village budget: 

Pay for the Ogden TIF preamble agreement with District 58 using Ogden TIF funds and report them in the annual TIF report. All taxing bodies had their chance to enter an agreement; it’s a requirement of TIF creation that other taxing bodies be notified of the intent, and they would have negotiated to enter into an agreement before the district formed just like 58.   In 2009 the annual required payment of $131,000 for the TIF district generated revenue-sharing was paid for out of the Real Estate Fund (226) a non-TIF fund.  The dollars will go up every year.  It’s long past time this annually repeating expense came off the General Fund ledger and goes into the TIF ledger where it properly belongs.  Amend or rider the agreement so that the payments come from the TIF district funds rather than general funds.

This could be a repeating annual savings starting at about $135,000 for FY2011 if the village does this.

The village has been paying this since 2001.  Those funds should be paid back; from the TIF increment back into the general fund.  Those ten years of payments total about $400,000 as a one-time revenue source.

Bill the CBD TIF for every penny spent from the General Fund. Some monies have been returned; there may still be General Obligation debt payments paid via Real Estate taxes that have not been properly restored to the general fund.  This includes re-combing the records for originating bond fees, early stage P&I payments that were budgeted from RE taxes, and employee expenses that were billed to the village that should have been billed to the TIF District.  Examples of employee expenses might include village time spent on the AOTG agreement, time spent by public works employees working inside the TIF district, and any other employee expenses directly related to CBD or Ogden Ave TIF District functions.

The village probably did not bill every hour into the TIF District budget, but it should have, to accurately account for the true cost of the district.  Council and staff set the precedent last year of billing hours to specific purposes.  The village might consider exploring budgeting and billing the TIF Districts for hours spent on the TIF’s.  This is tying costs to the source, and accounting accurately the cost of the TIF Districts.

Also in 2009 there was a one-time transfer of $200,000 from the Real Estate Fund (226).  That $200,000 can be restored to the General Fund at some point in time.

Will this force an extension of the CBD TIF District?  The current debt structure already guaranteed years ago that the CBD TIF would need to be extended when it expires.  There may be prohibitions against this; the Illinois TIF Statutes make clear only that all expenses have to be accounted for, it does not provide categories of acceptable or  unacceptable expenses, nor does it appear to prohibit correcting past accounting oversights.  It also provides that any surplus be redistributed to the various taxing bodies (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-7).

Combine reserve funds. The Parking Fund currently projects a cash balance of $500,000.  The Real Estate Fund has a cash balance of around $250,000.  There’s more fiunds and more cash reserves.  The village now knows exactly what a “rainy day” looks like.  Run the numbers for separate reserve funds, create a new General Reserve Fund in the budget, roll them in at an appropriate level.  No policy change about using reserves, just combine them into one reserve fund.

There might be $200,000-250,000 freed up one time by doing this.

Continuation of the Municipal Buildings Fund as a pay forward construction fund for a new civic center. A new civic center will not happen unless budgeting is as tight as a drumhead.  One way is to forward-fund a percentage of the project to offset interest costs on the debt balance borrowed.  Every dollar saved up front directly reduces TIC by 40 cents on the dollar.

Painful?  Yes.

The village will have to make do with existing facilities for several years?  Yes.

Use the opportunity to show the shared pain with taxpayers.  Everyone gives in hard times.  The conventional wisdom is spread the cost over the life of the project by borrowing.  Fire Station #2 showed there were significant savings to be had by saving money up front, and also by already owning the land, both of which eliminated substantial interest payments.  A new civic center needs costs blunted as much as is practical.

Sharing common cost across multiple jurisdictions. John Schofield President of Downers Grove Coalition for Managed Redevelopment, forwarded the concept of cross-jurisdictional cost cooperation.  Vehicle maintenance is one just one example.

This is already beginning.  Westmont and DG will soon share Ops Center expenses and personnel.  DG went to the cheaper suburban FIAT rather than going it alone with a dedicated SWAT team.  We now share one Fire Station coverage area with Woodridge-Darien.  Exploring shared use of like purposes provides savings via economy of scale.  If all your kids eat the same cereal, do you buy them each a box of the same cereal, or one bigger cheaper box?  If everyone buys paper, and one body uses so much they get a better deal, why not share that savings?

The unions have to help. There are two key labor contracts coming in 2011: fire and police, the two biggest personnel expenses.  Consider the concept of using dollars instead of percentages in the two union contract negotiations coming up, and try to peg those dollars uniformly across the ranks.  A $500 raise instead of a 1% raise saves several thousands by avoiding higher salaries triggering higher increases.  Freezing the size of the steps is imperative for sustainability without excessive downsizing.  Consider opening the books to the unions and asking them to help find the money-it isn’t there, and sometimes that is best discovered by all parties.  Keeping jobs is better than eliminating them to make ends meet.

Some of these might work, none of these might work, but it’s certainly worth looking at them all.  If any council member wants, they can  respond   with   their own suggestions and ideas.  Any email responses from elected officials will go up as a comment.

At the last June council meeting Mayor Sandack referred to 4-5 resident comments on the village website regarding Long Term Financial Planning that starts on June 29th.

The lack of input may be from lack of information. This link will take you direct to a 15 page village summary report on the current financial state, and starting point for next year’s budget-and beyond.

Yes, this does have a direct impact on your taxes and your own budgets.  Yes, there will be a test.

Comments on any topic related to budget, spending, whatever can be directed to: lrfp@downers.us

That gives Illinois the infamous distinction of having the nation’s worst pension problem.  Only it’s not the state’s problem.  In a classic example of effluvium flowing downhill, it’s our problem.

There’s plenty of blame for both political parties; you can’t pin this tail on just a donkey.  “Big Jim” Thompson got the whole ball rolling with his idea of using next year’s revenue receipts to pay for this years spending deficits.  It’s one thing to use future revenues to pay for present day expenses, but you have to have the money now to pay for now.  Talk is cheap, whiskey costs money.  So where did the cash for now come from?  You guessed it, from the pension funds.  It worked great; an untapped, seemingly endless supply of money that could be refilled later so there wouldn’t be any problems.

Except one; once the General Assembly got a taste of endless money, they could not stop spending, and the funds never really got refilled.  Something for this, something for that; money for this voting group, money for that constituency; entitlements here, there, and everywhere.  Edgar slowed the spending frenzy, Ryan kicked it back into gear, Blagojavich put entitlement spending onto a crack-addled overdrive, and wham!  The state is now borrowing money to pay current pension obligations, making taxpayers pay $1.40 for each $1 dollar in pension funding, and state crack-head politicians are asking taxpayers for even more money than that.  For 30 years Illinois has ignored its’ pension obligations.  While municipalities every taxing body with qualifying personnel have been required to make the contributions, state politicians have frittered it away.

Illinois’ unfunded pension liability owed to the state’s five public employee retirement systems (through end of FY2009):

• The State Employee Retirement System (SERS) is 46.1% funded
• The Teachers’ Retirement Systems (TRS) is 56% funded
• The State Universities Retirement System (SURS) is 58.5%
• The Judges Retirement System (JRS) is 42%
• The General Assembly Retirement System (GARS) is 32%
• The Illinois Municipal Retirement Find (IMRF) is 100% funded.*

* The IMRF is managed independent from the state.

These total an unfunded liability of 65 cents on the dollar and is the worst of any state in the nation.  Now the state has delayed paying in for 2010 until 2011, when they will probably borrow the money to make the payment.

The problem isn’t that the pensions are too generous.  Yes, there has been abuse of the system.  D99′s excessive raises to former Superintendent David Eblen resulted in him being ridiculously overpaid making his pension payout spectacular.  Just for that the D99 board should have their budget keys taken away, they obviously don’t value a dollar, and don’t understand the concept of no free lunch.  Or worse, they understand and don’t give a rat’s ass.  At any rate, it’s a sad fact this was not an isolated or unique incident; it happened all over the state and it happened right here.

The reality is most pensions are not over inflated but the state never made the required contributions.  When faced with not enough money to provide services and fund pensions, the state cheaped out on pensions, and kept expanding way past the core services required of a state government.  Politicians get ahead in their world by solving problems, and in their world solving problems requires spending money.

Although Illinois has more government agencies than any other state, we rank 48th in total headcount of state employees, so it’s not the size of state government that is dragging us down.  Now, there’s also township government that is a popular target for waste, but to off that layer of government, it would require a referendum process of huge scope, being fought every inch of the way by those township governments themselves.

Neither are the costs of the system itself too high.  The weighted average of all five Illinois pension systems is about 9.1%.  The national average for state and local  government is 12.5%.  We’re below the national average.

I’ve talked about switching to defined contribution pensions, a 401K type plan for new hires.  Even that has higher costs to administer than defined benefit plans, according to the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability.

According to the Investment Management Institute, the operating expense ratio for defined benefit plans averages 31 basis points (31 cents per $100 of assets); the average for defined contribution plans is three to six times higher, at 96 to 175 basis points. To put that in context of the Illinois pension systems, the administrative costs of a defined contribution system would in all likelihood cost taxpayers anywhere from $275 to $610 million more annually than the state’s current defined benefit systems.

Despite some beginning rumblings of accountability and the need to do something, currently there no solution in sight.  No one from either party in a position of power to do something about it is discussing it as a problem that must be solved, only pushed away for later.  Costs are increasing during down economic times due to bi-partisan cooperation for pension sweeteners authorized by the Illinois General Assembly; that means both sides are to blame, both party’s leadership has failed, and neither is doing anything about it except voting to delay doomsday, increase legalized vice, and blame each other while they sleep in the same bed.

So they want to raise our taxes so much to fix the pensions, right?  Wrong. Pensions are an un-addressed ticking time bomb, and the GA has left that bomb sitting squarely in the lap of every city and village, and every school district in Illinois.  Illinois public pension fund reserves have cratered due to budget raids, and also due to severe losses in market investments, ridiculously high management fees to those politically connected, and the escalating costs imposed by unfunded mandates authorized by the Illinois General  Assembly.

Those sweeteners and mandates have almost doubled the Village’s contributions for employee pensions over the last decade. Public employee contributions are capped at around 10% of their pay by the General Assembly (another sweetener), so the burden to make up the difference falls upon local taxpayers and utility rate-payers (to capture tax exempt property owners).  All the investment losses will start being replenished with the 2009 tax levy, which is collected on your 2010 property tax bill.  And yeah, they’re taking that money, but not paying it into the pensions.

Right from the start, it’s cold comfort but it could be worse for the village.  The State Universities Retirement System saw its assets decline nearly 28 percent in 2008.  The Teachers’ Retirement System, the state’s biggest pension, saw its portfolio drop 30 percent.  That’s a 58 and 99 problem that intrudes hugely into their budget picture over the next 5 years and more.  Let’s just say Martin and Eblen weren’t harbingers of the bad news; neither said word one of understanding a problem existed, as near as the records show.

Back to the village.  As required by State law, all municipal employees (police, fire, and all other personnel) are covered by three separate pension programs: Police pension, Fire Fighters pension, and the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)

Police. In 2007, the actual contribution to the pension fund was $1,680,424.  At that time it was expected to climb to $2,048,000 in 2010, and up to $2,565,000 in 2013.

The 2010 budget this year revises the Police pension contribution upwards to $2,365,508, 15.5% higher than the estimate made two years ago, and up almost 41% from 2007.  2013 contributions within the 2010 budget are projected to be $2,555,783, lower than the 2013 projections within the 2007 budget.

Are pension obligations declining that the projected contributions are being revised downward?  No they are not, so the projection should likewise be raised upward.

Fire. In 2007, the actual contribution to the pension fund was $2,146,148.  At that time it was expected to climb to $2,437,682 in 2010, and up to $2,789,405 in 2013.

The 2010 budget this year revises the Fire pension contribution upwards to $2,559,952, 5% higher than the estimate made two years ago, and up over 19% from 2007.  2013 contributions within the 2010 budget are projected to be $ 2,728,950, lower than the 2013 projections within the 2007 budget.

Are pension obligations declining that the projected contributions are being revised downward?  No they are not, so the projection should likewise be raised upward.

Expecting pension contributions to drop for both Police and Fire means they expect pension payout demand to drop?  That doesn’t follow; if payroll bodies and/or dollars increase, what does follow is pension payout demands being higher, not lower.

What has changed is the state has lowered required contributions to those pension funds.  It eases some budgeting pinch, but not enough, and simply adds to the underfunding problem.

The mantra used to be that government and public sector workers get good benefits and job security in lieu of high salaries, but since 2004 at the latest that gap between public and private employee paychecks disappeared.  It’s hard to come by perfect comparisons, since government numbers for the private sector include lower-wage industries like retailing, which pull down the averages, but overall, public-sector workers get a pretty good deal. In 2004 average salary for a public worker was $49,275 compared with $34,461 for everyone else, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI). Since then, both pay and benefits have risen without pause, widening that gap.

Readers here at DGreport have been studying the budget.  Outsourcing alone won’t get it done because the three budget busters are personnel salaries, personnel pensions, and payments on bond debt.

We can’t change  pensions, and we’re locked in on paying back money we borrowed, so that leaves payroll.  Can the village cut salaries and take out some of the raise steps?  If we don’t at least reduce the raise steps by 10% minimum we are back at square one in two years of not having enough money to pay for everything.  Did this all happen because every public body went on a protracted effort to raise pay without sacrificing benefits or pensions?  That they had to stay competitive?  I attended plenty of meetings of most taxing bodies where that was exactly the point made, by a revolving cast of presenters over many years.  Well, now we’re competitive, and we’re broke, and not one public taxing body is talking about reducing that pay so we’re not broke.

The village has $8 million a year in debt payments for the next three years, then it drops to $5 million a year in debt payments-unless the village borrows more for contracts to engineering and construction firms for stormwater. For now, that’s the plan.

The village has $77 million in debt and we still haven’t addressed the causes of stormwater flooding; we’re still just fixing the resulting problems.

Fire and Police, and even the Library may have to reduce their budgets.  If it takes one, or two, or ten cycles of zero base line budgeting to accomplish that goal then it’s time to start.  As it is, those three government unit budgets have gone up each year, every year.

Taxes went up last year, and they may increase next year too.  Do local taxing bodies have any other choice?  Not unless they are willing to address payroll, pensions and debt…and they can’t address existing pensions and debt.

So far, the angst is palpable.  Council can raise every tax and fee, and hit the property tax bill, and next year lowered assessments start kicking back.  As assessments go down, tax bills will go up again, and everyone will wonder why.  Schools may be asking for PTELL exemptions to keep up with increases in personnel costs, or start playing the shell game of sloshing funds around and then moving what’s left (like new roofs and building repairs) into backdoor referendums so they can borrow the money now without asking taxpayers for an okay.  Nevermind there’s no sound way to repay $1.40 for every dollar borrowed at some later date.

This is not a problem that will get fixed this year.  Whatever budget gets approved by all local taxing bodies next cycle, it must not be the end of a continuing, continuous budget discussion.  The village comes closest to getting that type of continuous process, but both school boards have been forced to focus on money because of the state late-paying.

The surface has just been scratched  So far Band-Aids have been applied, but the patient needs major surgery, and the doctors still have no suitable set of tools to use.

David Vaught, Governor Quinn’s budget director, announced Quinn’s intention of reducing income tax payments to municipalities in Illinois by 30%.

“You need to take a look and say OK, does everybody have skin in the game here?” Vaught said. “It just doesn’t make sense that the municipalities would get a pass.”

While there is no plan to fully fund the $4.1 billion in required state pension obligation, the state proposes refusing to distribute the normal 10% of state income tax receipts to local municipalities, creating a $300 million gain for the state.

For 2010, DG had budgeted for $3.75 million in state income tax revenue.  That budgeted number represents a grimly realistic decline of  almost 10% over 2009, and almost 19% from 2008.  If adopted by the state, DG stands to lose up to $1.125 million in revenues, blowing another hole in the financials.

On Wednesday Quinn plans a state address to broach this topic, along with another pitch for a large increase in the state income tax.

Everyone on council agreed this was a tough budget to do, and in the end all but  Commissioner William Waldack voted for it. Several council members echoed Bruce Beckman’s request for a “debriefing” so that the good and bad of this year’s marathon process could be reviewed and improvements wrought.

Most council members had something they didn’t like about the budget.  Waldack had the best visual aids, using a can of soda to explain how little it would take to avoid the cuts, and comparing an apple core to an apple to explain the difference between what functions are necessary, what services are needed beyond that, and how the extra beyond a core minimum makes a community more complete.  His comments garnered applause from the audience.

Mayor Sandack kept coming back to a familiar theme: personnel expenses are outstripping the village’s ability to pay them: Here’s the dollars we have, here’s the things wanted.  We don’t have the money, math is math.  By stripping the budget this year, next year may be easier to figure out.

Going, going, gone

DARE is gone.  The two most junior patrol policemen are gone at the end of year.  Counseling and Social Services: also gone EOY, although it’s unclear whether the department director carries on. Community Events has been pared to just one person.  No open positions will be filled.  Community Grants are gone.  The village’s contribution to Meals on Wheels is gone.  The senior taxi subsidy continues at two-thirds its previous level.

Heritage Fest is gone as a village-enabled event.  The Ice Festival is gone as a village event, but will return as a smaller event over Valentine’s Day weekend (more on that in a later post).  The Criterion bike races are gone unless someone wants to pick up the reins.  Fourth of July parade and fireworks stay, tree-lighting and events at Thanksgiving stay, the Bike and Buggy parade stay.

Despite the cuts, taxes are up: The increase to a home with $300K market value will be somewhere around $48, depending on what gets abated.  Sales tax goes up .25% on July 1, 2010.

You can read the village press release here.  After noting to staff that the costs for Heritage Fest keep shifting around, the latest quoted is $494,000.  After earlier seeing the cost estimated $161,000, $30,000, $80,000, and $7,820, $494K seems a bit high.

Heritage Fest is dead.  Long live Heritage Fest.

David Humphries has served on the Community Events Commission for 26 years.  That’s one year less than the run of  Heritage Fest.  He made many pertinent points, including how HF generates about $40,000 in sales tax from sales at local businesses — revenues that are not reflected in the financial reckonings.

We’ve written before about how HF acts as a charity-giving leveraged multiplier, creating significant revenues for youth groups and not-for-profits; you name it, all get operating money from a HF event.   When it was decided the village was out of the HF business in 2010, some actual costs were not known — to decision-makers, to the CEC, or to the residents.  However, there is now a list of costs for events that require a permit, which any replacement for HF will be, so those will be known shortly.

I went to the CEC meeting ready to ask that the commission reach out to civic groups for help to keep HF going in 2010 and, wouldn’t you know it,  those groups were there too, volunteering to step up to keep an event going that had so many benefits, fiscal and otherwise, to the community.

Just another example how DG rocks.  There’s still more to be worked out, but the village can do a lot to make this happen this year as a cost-neutral event if they want to do it. Council voted last week to kill it for 2010.  If commissioners don’t throw any roadblocks down, Heritage Fest may still take place this coming year in that smaller, more focused format many DGreport readers have tossed around, incorporating ideas many have posited here and elsewhere.

But if Heritage Fest costs anywhere near the latest village estimate of $494,000, no civic group will be able to do it.

So far it looks like the Rotarians, Noon Lions, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Management Corp. and the Economic Development Corporation are all willing to pitch in.  More planning help, more volunteer help will be needed.  For those willing to pitch in, stay tuned. The next Community Events Commission meeting is in two weeks.

One thing contributing to the budget squeeze is something government taxing bodies do that we all do: borrow money.  They do it via bonds, which are debt securities with longer than 10 year maturities.The basic idea behind municipal borrowing is to spread the cost of a project time-wise to capture a larger percentage of resident users who benefit from the product of the borrowing.  By borrowing money for a fire station, that 20 year debt is repaid by a wider range of taxpayers than if it was paid for cash on the barrel head by who live here right now.  At least, that’s how it’s been explained to me by various village managers over the years (note: current VM Fieldman was not one of them).

You can click on any graph for larger images. The first graph on the right shows deficit borrowing since 1998.  With the exceptions of two years, DG has borrowed money each year to do something right away, and planned to pay it back over time.  At the front end most of this was TIF borrowing to buy and assemble properties for the Acadia on the Green development and the Parking Garage.  1998 represents $3 million borrowed for Fairview Avenue reconstruction, and a dedicated 1.5 cent/gallon gasoline tax was enacted to pay for the bond.  There was also a 2001 $4 million bond issue to install automated water meter readers throughout the village, and water fund revenues were dedicated to pay for it.  Both of these bonds have dedicated single sources to pay for them, so in some ways can be considered Revenue Bonds, but they both have a backstop of the taxpayer should anything go awry, so they are counted by the village as general obligation bonds.

The rest of the bonds issued before 2007 are for the Central Business District Tax Increment Finance District- The CBD TIF that we’ve reported on in the past.  While there are specific TIF Bonds, here in DG our TIF bands are still general obligation bonds.  When the village started issuing them, there was no Tax Increment to pay for them.  All the way up through today, DG still relies on general fund tax receipts and parking fund money transfers to make TIF bond payments, although it has been said those general funds have been repaid out of the TIF fund and accounts are now in balance.

The neon blue represents bond re-fundings.  These are typically done to take advantage of lower interest rates, lower the Total Interest Costs (TIC) of the borrowing.  Usually, as is the case here, the cost of issuing the bonds are more than made up for by the interest savings.  This does not reduce the outstanding principle, it replaces it.  In the case of the almost $10 million borrowed in 2005, it replaced the remaining balance of $12.7 million in 1999 and 200 borrowings.  On the down side, like when you refinance a home, the time span extends back out again, so the village, although paying less, is paying longer.

Some refi bonds. like the 2008A bond issue that refunds 1999, 2000, and 2003 bonds, have odd payment schedules.  This looks almost like a balloon payment loan, with the last two payments being whoppers.  Look for those to be dinked around with before the balloon pops in 2020.

The Series 2009 bonds refunded $12 million in bond debt from 2003.  After paying about $1.125 million a year for the first 6 years, the payments dropped to around $1.04 million a year.  Over the next ten years that saves the village over $600,000 in interest costs-just like you refinance a home when it makes sense.  Anyone who bought a house in the 12% mortgage early ’80′s is probably a refi expert.

There are basically three types of debt in the village: TIF debt, stormwater debt, and other debt like Fairview and the AMR’s).  The graph at right shows the total debt payments for all three types of debt has sort of piled up on us.  Keep in mind the TIF increment is supposed to pay for the TIF debt, but that’s money that may not be available to spend elsewhere for things like streets and infrastructure repairs.  TIF revenues have limited uses, and generally have to be used within the TIF district itself.  Although Village Hall and the Police Station are within the CBD TIF, no TIF generated funds can be spent on public facilities.  Blame that on past abuse where cities and villages used the TIF for new Taj Mahal Civic Centers.  Can’t be done anymore.

If you think $8 million a year for the next three years for debt payments is steep, it is.  At least $2.5 million of that is pure interest payments.  Coulda woulda shoulda ten years ago set $2 million a year aside for stormwater projects?  Would have saved us almost $16 million in interest payments over the next 30 years.  All we need is a time machine to go back and we’re all set.   In 2013 the village is scheduled to at least consider another round of stormwater financing, and right now a stormwater utility is far away.

As it is, the last two years of CBD TIF analysis shows that this district won’t come close to paying off the $45.2 million it still owes before the TIF expires in 2021.  In this case the annual payments ramp up every year from a bit under $3 million a year to just over $5 million a year.  It appears this was a clear skies and sunny days repayment schedule.  That may change if it stays dark clouds and rainy days.  Another refi.  This is the blue component of the total payment chart above.

An artifact of the recession is that consumers have reduced revolving (credit card) and installment debt, and increased their rate of saving.  the net result is the average citizen is paying less in interest costs.  Interest doesn’t buy you anything.  Even on your home loan interest costs you only recover a percentage of the interest costs as a tax deduction.

The same is true of muni loans.  Over the next 30 years the village is scheduled to pay $102,044,433 on $71,235,000 of bond debt.  Do the math.  That averages  $1 million a year just for interest.  Doesn’t buy us anything, just pays for the money we already spent.

Ogden Avenues TIF district offers a different model, and in a time when the ground rules for doing things have changed, may offer a guide towards some future spending.  In the case of Ogden avenue, money is saved up first, then spent.  The sidewalks going in along Ogden?  The sewer work being done?  No interest costs.  Zip nada.  Instead of every $1 spent needing $1.40 in repayment, and .40 of non productive expense, it all goes to goods and services, dollar for dollar.

We even have a sorta/kind example of it.  Back in the 80′s the village purchased the homes immediately south of old Fire Station #2.  By buying them when we had the cash, it cut the land acquisition costs by a couple hundred thousand dollars.  By saving, we wouldn’t make much in interest payments right now (check CD rates), but we would avoid further borrowing down the road.

It’s not something that can be done right at the moment, but if-when the economy picks back up, and when the village trims expenses back to the bone, and when there are surpluses, perhaps the idea of saving for future projects will have some attraction.

The current Debt Service Summary from the 2010 budget is here.

This is going to be a collaborative report, and will be modified.  I took what EJ wrote last night and spliced in my own notes, and she will do the same later.  I encourage everyone to chime in with their own thoughts, as a couple times I was caught in a “what the…” mode.  I’m sure EJ was not referring to my gray hair (note: I have less gray hair every day), but I’ve been watching budgets take form for a while now, and I’ve never seen anything like this 4-3 vote before, but there you go.

The National Championships of Cycling (“The granddaddy of Midwest cycling events”), last held August 15-16 on the scenic streets of Downers Grove are gone.  End of story.  There was no support on dais in favor of maintaining the annual Criterion races, which should ring a dinner bell for the other suburbs that have been licking their chops over the prospect of hosting this national sporting event.

As for Heritage Fest, a lot of time and talk was proffered tonight as staff rolled out a proposal to trim $90,000 in expenses, cut down to no more than three stages and downsize the whole thing, much as had been discussed here at DGreport.

Mayor Ron Sandack may have offered the best and most realistic long-term solution when he suggested suspending the event  in 2010 in order to give the Community Events department and Community Events commission time to reconfigure the fest and recruit private sources of support.

Commissioner Sean Durkin, when apprised that there have been no contracts for the event signed yet, said he would then just cut it, to which Mayor Sandack quickly interjected “If you were king for a day.”  (Laughter)

Durkin also offered that the fest was too spread out, and that the downtown had changed from when it first started.  There was a lot of talk about true cost of the fest, as Martin Tully commented elsewhere:

Heritage Festival cost the taxpayers $161,000 last year. As suspected, that figure is not derived from the operation of the festival, per se, but instead largely from the personnel costs associated with the community events staff that is charged with planning and running ALL events conducted in the Village.

Commissioner Marilyn Schnell said it’s hard to justify keeping a “$300,000 party” while cutting two policemen.  Commissioner Bob Barnett  said he was in favor of a severely reduced Heritage Fest, as a precursor to moving  it off the village dime and killing the Community Events Department.  Moving the village out of Heritage Fest doesn’t mean it would end, just that someone other than the village would provide it, he explained.

Commissioners Neustadt, Waldack, and Beckman agreed the annual blow-out needs to be down-sized.  Sandack suggested something more like a village-wide block party.  When HF started that’s kind of the vibe it had, before the bigger carny rides and food on a stick.  Commissioner Bill Waldack said that Heritage Fest is more than just a party, and it should be redirected to be more appropriate.

Stay thirsty at Fest my friends, and buy pop from Boy Scouts.

A Boy Scout from Troop 89 commented that selling pop at the fest allowed him and many others to finance their participation in scouting events.  As a former Scoutmaster (Troop 55, the finest in DG), I can verify that.  We paid scouts out of the money made to work the booth, which allowed several scouts to earn money for events such as summer camp which they would not have been able to otherwise attend.

Just one example that Heritage Fest does more for the community than just provide a pork chop on a stick.

So look for Heritage Fest to be modest this year, and if it can’t be moved outside the village budget it may disappear in 2011.  If you feel strongly pro or con on Heritage Fest, you might want to attend the Community Events Commission meeting on Thursday.

When each councilman did a summation, they were to say where the extra savings should go.  Neustadt said to keep the tax levy where it is and direct the savings to the general fund.  Waldack said to use it on seniors programs such as  Meals on Wheels and human services.

Durkin said to put it towards reducing the $900,010 draw from reserves, Schnell said to use it for cops or to reduce the tax levy or add back social services, Beckman said counseling and social services, and Barnett said any savings goes toward the deficit.

The meeting amped up when council members gave their final thoughts on the levy.  Waldack suggested that they raise the levy ceiling by $500,000 so they could continue to parse down what really needed to be cut and what might get a partial reprieve.

He said he was miffed that the use of reserves was being employed when they should have raised the sales tax long enough ago that it would kick in January 1 and provide the extra revenue the village needed.  He even cited former mayor Brian Krajewski as having set a good example.

Neustadt said he was okay with everything as it was.

Durkin asked about the library budget, which is up four percent, and Village Manager Dave Fieldman responded that the library board is an autonomous body outside of council control beyond the mayor’s responsibility to appoint board members.  Sandack just renewed six year terms for Library Board President Stephen Daniels  and member Kathy DiCola.

Beckman prefaced his remarks by relating his extensive budget experience as a D99 school board member.  He said good governance is built on compromise and that as a school board member he never once voted against a budget levy because it was a product of compromise.

This budget, he said, he would vote against because it represented no compromise, and he went on to list several examples of revenue sources ignored and cuts pushed through.  He held up the West Suburban Living magazine (see page 100)  and noted that most every item cited as making Downers Grove a great place to live was being cut completely, or in the case of Heritage Fest, cut back.

Beckmanwas not pleased that all of the fine arts and cultural support had been stripped out completely, but was particularly displeased that counseling and social services are to be completely shut down; to him and many others these were elements of the village character that helped define the village as a great place to live.  He ended by saying he would be voting “no” to a budget for the first time.

Barnett supported the staff recommended levy, noting that at this time there is no budget to make them all comfortable,  that no one thing defines us, and that none of the cuts are long-lived expenses.

Schnell said it’s disturbing alternative revenue sources have not been found.  “I can’t understand how we can tax our people 12 and a half percent but we won’t institute red-light cameras that will hit people who are breaking the law. ” She also indicated she would be voting no.

Sandack was agitated by the time his turn came.  “I’ve got  a colleague to my right who flippantly says let’s add $500,000 to the property tax, I’ve got a colleague to my left who says she in good conscience can’t raise what is being proposed even thought the vast majority of it is being jammed down out throats because they’re pension obligations, and I’ve got a colleague who says because we didn’t compromise on Counseling and Social Services he’s not going to vote  on the budget.”

“That’s not a lack of compromise, that’s a lack of consensus,” Sandack said.

The village cannot be all things to all people, he said, adding that a village dentist would be great, but when times got tough they’d be up there arguing about how could they stop this vital service.  Good leadership is not a popularity contest, he said, and the current math is irrefutable.

The village has to chop away to end up with a budget that allows for a sustainable government.  “How did we fund Meals on Wheels in the first place?” he asked rhetorically.  It was pretty obvious he was frustrated and maybe even tired when he called for a motion.

There were attempts to speak by Beckman and Waldack, but any Robert’s Rules devotee knows the time for talk was past once it got to that point.  Durkin read the motion-always a whopper as it includes all outstanding bond debt issuances, and the vote was taken.

AYES: Barnett, Durkin, Neustadt, Sandack.  NAYS: Beckman, Schnell, Waldack.

So what does it mean?

Right now, less than you’d think, although the vote sets a ceiling for how much the village can spend and, as a result,  how much it can raise property taxes.  The discussion will continue next week.

EJ will take this ball back and run with it tomorrow.  I’ll be back Friday.

Lost in the commotion

A very positive report by Greg Bedalov on the move by Dover Corp. to Downers Grove from New York City.  “From Park Avenue to Highland Avenue” was his quip, suggesting Mayor Sandack might call  Mayor Bloomberg to say no hard feelings.  Sandack did a “Yeah right he’d take my call.” rejoinder.  Levity and good news before the budget storm clouds moved in.

Huge upside here.  The Landmark V building, with DeVry and now Dover moving in, goes from zero percent occupied to more than 90 percent occupied.  Property taxes go from about $7,000 per year to about $700,000 per year.  Of that, the village gets about $70,000, D58 gets about $240,000 and D99 gets about $210,000.  Way to go!

Community Events will face deep cuts, deeper than previously reported here on DGreport (search “budget” for other budget posts).  Depending on the future, this entire department could radically change to a mostly volunteer driven effort.  Heritage Fest will get a haircut, as Neustadt said and others echoed, right-sized for what they can do.  Waldack voiced a common sentiment that the volunteer boards and commissions will have to step up to the plate and get more involved in a more community-oriented, perhaps shorter summer festival.

The Senior Taxi Program goes to 50/50. Waldack laid out a set of statistics on usage that drilled down to less than 500 users, and questioned the need for expiration dates.  Several commissioners and Mayor Sandack noted that Peace and Immanual do not have a van like Fairview Village does, and that maybe they should begin to look into alternatives.  Community activist Laurel Bowen at the last Saturday listening meeting offered that there are local volunteer groups that will help with rides, but that’s not a 24/7 deal, it’s good-hearted volunteers.

Community Grants is de-funded.  Choral Society, Senior Orchestra, Midwest Ballet, all zeroed out.  There will probably be assistance in tutoring these groups to find other sources of funding like corporate contributions and subscription-based funding, but those groups that want to survive will have to adapt quickly, reduce overhead to the bone, or maybe even go dormant.

DuPage Senior Grant: Meals on Wheels won’t get DG funding.  The program here in DG runs over $300,000, with the village contributing $36,000 last year, so the program itself is not de-funded, just DG’s contribution to it.  This amount has changed up and down over several years.

The village will use reserve funds.  The rainy day is officially here.  Durkin and Barnett were dead set against it, but it would be a 5-2 moot point if it came to it.

The DARE Program, and the two police officers, are de-funded to zero.  This budget item along with the senior taxis got the most public comment in prior council listening sessions.  Chief Porter has the job of finding how to cut either two policemen, or about $135,000 from somewhere else.  Paul (didn’t catch last name) from the Police local Fraternal Order said his union stands firm to keep the same number of police on the streets.  There were several off-duty officers attending, some in uniform.  This could escalate if heads don’t stay cool.  Durkin pressed the point that council was talking about eliminating two police officer positions, which he does not favor, but he was in the minority along with Neustadt.  It’s possible $135K of cuts can be found elsewhere.  Chief Porter has his work cut out for him.

The Home Rule Sales Tax will go up.  Staff recommended ¼%, but it has not been locked there.

Property Taxes will be going up.  How much is still open for discussion.  Police/Fire/ Public Works and other fundamental services run $27 million give or take, and property taxes pull in about $9 million.  Sandack and Barnett are talking making that a designated core service funding mechanism, and raising it maybe more than originally thought.  As staff proposed, $1 million in revenue would mean roughly a $58 tax hike on a $300,000 market value home.

Off of the plate this year but probably back on for next year are a Vehicle Sticker Tax, Red Light Cameras, increased monthly parking rates, moving vehicle service to an outside contractor, and a Liquor Tax.

Barnett was the first to acknowledge the 800 pound gorilla in the budget- payroll and pensions.  Readers here know pensions are out of our control, so payroll has to be brought into play.  Barnett suggested what appears to be zero baseline budgeting for departments, where the funding is not automatically started at the previous year’s level.  This has worked for other governments in the past, but comes with a heavy dose of strife and angst.  He pointed out that everything that had been discussed was not enough — not enough cuts and not enough tax increases — and if they don’t make fundamental changes the problems will resurface a couple years from now. The 2012 and 2015 (union contract renewal years) are critical.

Sandack picked up the theme in his wrap-up comments that DG’s government has to get sized right to provide sustainable services at an affordable level.  Health plans, payroll, and pensions are outstripping their efforts to find revenues to keep up.  Again, existing pensions are out of local control, but payroll and health care are not.  Currently 75 percent of the budget goes to personnel costs, not directly to core services for residents.

Sandack quoted Martin Tully: “’We have finite resources and infinite needs.”

He continued, “Here’s our next challenge; to right-size this organization.  I believe we can do it.  It will not be without pain. It will be with significant pain.  But in the long run this organization will be far more sustainable–  predictable –  in that we’ll know what’s paying for what and what we’re getting.”

There are two more budget meetings before the levy ceiling is decided.  The budget is scheduled to be finalized and approved December 15.

Yep. Frozen over. Time to deal with it.

Our village employees, in light of recent changes to overtime, health insurance and pay, still enjoy a generous compensation package.  Some say too generous; some say well worth it.  The reality is our local government is immune from free market private sector factors that set the pay point where demand meets supply.

Can we afford this?

The taxpayers of Downers Grove, who must pay, don’t have the say that customers of private sector business do, who decide if they want to pay.  That lays false the claim that government is in the service business, and that we are their customers.  They are in the government business, and taxpayers are the mandatory funder of that business.  The provided protections to our health, safety, and welfare are not a service, they are core functions of a civil society.

Can tech help lessen increases?

Along the right side are personnel cost charts for each budgeted department.  You can click on any chart for a full sized version.  What you’ll see are some smaller departments already taking their haircuts, some with a small dip before resuming 3-7% annual increases, and the biggest not even pausing as they become more expensive every year.

Costs double in 5 yrs? Can this Dept combine with I.S.?

As the private sector has tightened their belts during this economic downturn, so should local tax-supported government bodies.  If private companies can cut wage costs to keep their organizations afloat, government should do the same to keep its budget in balance by relying more on trimming costs without coming to the belt-tightened taxpayer and holding out their hand for more.  While that may be a time honored tradition, it’s no longer a sustainable budget model.

Can this curve be bent down?

Despite a brief pause total payroll will continue to escalate if staff projections are to be believed.  But if that happens as projected, and the economy doesn’t shift back into high gear, the problem only gets kicked down the road for later.

According to at least one economist who went on record last week at a council meeting, that quick recovery isn’t going to happen.  Things aren’t going to get better for years.  Something has to give, something fundamentally large in the budget, and that’s payroll.  If Downers Grove cut payroll by 10% for 2010 over 2009, the payroll expenses, instead of increasing almost $840,000, would decrease almost $2.8 million.  That’s a difference of $3.64 million, severely chopping into the 2010 $5 million shortfall.

Belt tightened. Big time.

Payroll “steps” that have been tweaked and massaged several times over the last several years now need to be de-tweaked, deflated, flattened.  It’s a different world from even three years ago, and the pay steps need to be revisited, so that pay does not simply climb back out of control in future budgets.  By reducing each pay step increase by a third, the budget shock of the future payroll curve is bent down, giving the next 5 years of budgets a fighting chance of being balanced without tax increases.

Fire is #2 for personnel expense.

Is this disheartening to the morale of our local government employees?  Some will say yes; so much so our services will suffer, and previously cheerful attitudes will be dark and grumpy.  Fast and efficient will give way to slow and half-baked.  Others say no, everyone knows the budget dilemma we face, everyone knows these are hard times, everyone knows they would rather be a part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

Brutal cuts, effective cost control.

The planning so far and the steps taken already have centered on cuts that have had only modest short-term effect on staunching the red ink.  Cuts to Community Grants, Counseling & Social Services, a couple Community Events, attrition of employees, leaving vacancies unfilled, optimizing vehicle use and other steps are implemented and have worked; the various cost saving measures all combined gets us halfway to where the budget needs to be; balanced and sustainable without a tax increase of any kind.

Needs a shallower rising slope. Combine with Communications for a single Department?

Council sets policy, and the Village Manager is the Chief Operating Officer of Downers Grove.  After hearing the repeated statements that this is the time for bold leadership, I would suggest this is the time for calm resolve and common sense.

Over the next few weeks every Department needs to come under the microscope.  How can they provide required core functions to the village at the least cost and the highest efficiency?

Holding steady. Fingers crossed.

In 1982 Tom Peters and Robert H. Waterman, Jr. wrote a book “In Search of Excellence” and while I’ve said above that government is not a service business and we’re not customers, consider these two findings: one, what can be measured, can be analyzed and possibly improved, and two, simple organization and lean staff lead to cost and speed advantages.

Not participating in cost cutting. This is total budget. Personnel costs increase over 5%/yr.

There are formal programs that collect and analyze data that can help identify strengths and weaknesses, and can point to efficiencies and reductions.  Baltimore has used CitiStat for several years, consistently reducing expenses while improving efficiencies and productivity.  There are four tenets to Citistat:

• Accurate and timely intelligence shared by all.
• Rapid deployment of resources.
• Effective tactics and strategies.
• Relentless follow up and assessment.

Just one example of a city using innovation to work itself out of budget and productivity problems.

#1 personnel cost.

Council might consider tasking the VM with directing the various department heads to find ways to reduce their Department expenses 10% in 2010, 3% in 2011, and 2% in 2012.  Maintain the hiring freeze until future notice.  Empower employees to make decisions, minimizing the need for layers of supervision.  With the various heads of Departments in the village  taking responsibility for finding the cuts, they would face the same task they would face working in the real service sector, in the private sector.  Here’s what you are required to do, here is your budget.  Square peg meet round hole.  Fit it in.

Big cuts. Then big increases?

There was a comprehensive round of tax increases last year, mostly disguised as fees and taxes on utilities.  This year council is revisiting tax increases and looking at every revenue source they didn’t tap last year.  What happens next year, and the year after?  And on top of implemented and expected tax increases at the state and federal level, do we simply add on some more?

This looks okay, but still the annual 3.4%+ increases.

So far, following the budget process has led down many paths.   Real Estate Taxes, consumptive taxes like Home Rule Sales Tax and “Restaurant Tax”, Car Sticker Tax, all create revenue that simply won’t keep up with expenses as they stand.  It looks like it works but it just kicks the problem down the road two or three years to be dealt with again, only in a meaner nastier form.  The challenge is using this opportunity to innovate how local government works.

Making local government smaller and flatter seems a prudent first step.  Planning for sustainability of annual budgets would seem a logical next action item.  And with as much talk as there has been about the concept of core competencies, no one has yet identified what those may be.

Flatten the increases!

Fortunately, it’s not subjective.  Back at the top the idea of government as a service provider with residents as customers was dismissed as rhetoric.  If Government were a service provider then they would constantly be adding this and that budget buster that once in place they would be loathe to eliminate so long as “customers” wanted it.

Will more cuts land here?

And that’s what has happened here in Downers Grove; because government did not understand it’s raison d’être it went astray, and left us with inflated budgets that, first sign of trouble, imploded.  In the meantime, we came to think a Chevy Suburban is the only vehicle that can provide our Fire and Police a way to get around, and that $30,ooo for one Heritage Fest Musical act is normal.  A Hyundai Santa Fe costs 40% less,  gets better mileage, has a longer factory warranty, and will get our Police and Fire guys around just as fast and just as safely.  It can even be ordered in Dark Cherry Red for the Fire Department.

Short and sweet; the functions of government:

• Public health and safety. Fire, police, and emergency dispatch, garbage pick up, and enforcement of municipal code are all examples.
• Maintenance of public infrastructure. Water, sewer, sanitation, streets and sidewalks, snow plowing and street sweeping are some examples.
• Community-wide planning and development. Zoning, enforcement of building codes, maintaining rational development and redevelopment.
• Intergovernmental cooperation. To reduce costs and to improve functions.

Everything else is gravy, extras that make us feel good if we choose to pay for them, and maybe irk us if we are forced to pay for them against our will.  But some of those extras are what define us as a community.  Do we need a Heritage Fest?  Technically “No” is the correct answer.  I would say “Yes” anyway; it provides a cultural reason for all residents to gather for no need other than to have some fun together, and eat some corn on the cob (and woe to those who under-cook it, but we’ll be back next year for more anyway).

Why did you move to Downers Grove and why do you stay here?  Because the garbage gets picked up?  Because we have a Fire Department?  We feel better about ourselves and our village because Tuesdays in the summer there’s a concert at Fishel Park.  That kids can ride their bikes, trikes or ride in a Dad powered wagon down Main Street in a parade just for them.  That on Friday nights in the summer there’s a car show.  That our downtown at Christmas time looks the part.  We don’t all go, we don’t all use everything always, we might not even like some of it, but we belong to it all, we can use it if we choose to, so we should also choose to plan that those things can continue too, even if in a survival mode now until things get better later.

The cultural extras we appreciate and value just as much as our schools and our location; just as much as the basic functions that our government provides us.  We take pride not just in the events and opportunities, but also in our village alumni who go on to bigger and better things.

All of those cultural things that identify us and make us a community have value.  We might not understand the value until they are gone, but the value is there.  It’s  overlooked by mere number crunching and under-appreciated by those who miss the importance of belonging to a diverse group with similar values.

Can the necessary cuts be made to straighten out our budgets and make them sustainable?  That requires hard resolve.  Can we hang onto the most important cultural elements that are part of our well-being?  That requires empathy.

The next budget meeting is Saturday morning, a Coffee with the Council at Fire Station #2, starting at 9am.

This eighth budget meeting was the first of nine meetings that will actually lead to a real budget.  All of the programs that have had cuts proposed for them were lined up to be discussed.  Mayor Sandack took a straw vote to see where the big turnouts were for what issue, and took the big ones first.  He stressed more than once that the village simply does not have enough money for business as usual, and a couple times asked residents up commenting if they had any ideas where to find the money.  The question was not asked in a argumentative way, it sounded like he really hoped someone had an AHA! idea.

Village Manager Dave Fieldman and Mike Baker made presentations as the three hour meeting wound on, then the floor was opened to comments and input from residents, then council.  Fieldman was cautious to note that the proposed budget was just that; a proposed budget.  Sandack reiterated before resident comments began; any budget changes are proposals at this point, nothing is etched in stone, nothing is a done deal, but they have to do something.  Noting the tenor and mindset of a typical DG’er, simply enacting a massive tax increase is not an option.

Personnel expenses are the killer.  Inexorable increases have been somewhat controlled through attrition, a hiring freeze, and an early separation program started this year.  He detailed the types and amounts of cuts made and to be made, and broke out how much of a Real Estate Tax increase would help balance the books.

Bottom line, even with all the cuts, RE taxes on a home with a market value of about $300,000 would see their village portion of the bill go up $50.

Although it was presented as one of two possible scenarios, it’s the DARE Program in schools that is under the knife.  Dropping the two lowest ranking police officers would save $130,000.  Many residents complimented the program, including Sandack.  Some parents suggested maybe the PTA might be able to help.  Some parents reported their kids insisted Mom or Dad go speak in favor of DARE.  Several students made the best case for keeping DARE alive for it’s drug education. “We can learn from trying it or the other way (DARE)” was one comment by a student.  Others pointed out they learn to trust police, like the two officers, and listen to them better than their parents.  Another teacher pointed out if she did DARE training it’s just another subject in a long day, when the DARE officers come in it gets kids attention.

Municipalities across the country are axing their DARE programs. If axed, DARE would continue through the current school year, and staff will try and figure out how to deal with it, yeah or nay, for next school year.

Several residents spoke about more robust police enforcement of existing traffic laws, generating more tickets for violations.

Resident Dave Humphreys and several others also spoke to the need to keep the Community Grants Program and support for the arts going, even if at a much lower level.  Humphreys has won awards for his volunteerism in nurturing and nursing a variety of programs, and he was very quick to spread those accolades around, noting the village support and the resident support are what make cultural events possible.  He also noted that events and groups that contribute to our quality of life here in DG also add to our desirability as a place to live and help our property values.

One of the programs supported by Community Grants Program is the DuPage Senior Citizen Grant (DSCC), which is also the Meals on Wheels program.   The Choral Society, the Midwest Ballet, the Senior Orchestra all rely on Community grants for a portion of their operating funds.

The village staff had already done a study on how they might tighten up the taxi coupon program for seniors, and that may have accounted for no residents speaking for or against the program.

Community Events focused in on Heritage Fest.  Elimination of the holiday tree lighting ceremony or decoration program had no objectors, but some did speak that the Ice Festival in February is a welcome break from the winter doldrums, and brings a big local crowd out to the downtown.  Several resident volunteers for the HF Car Show (not the Friday night car shows) spoke that they add no cost to the event, but draw people, and volunteer run that.  DGreport regular Chad Walz asked about, and suggested pursuing larger corporate sponsors to offset costs.  At this point it appears this department will face cuts.

Counseling and Social Services will likely get budget cuts.  There are mixed reports nation-wide about the value of social programs and family counseling as provided by municipalities.  On the minus side it is a service that is duplicated somewhat at the county level and by other social services groups.  On the plus side it may be acting as the “ounce of prevention” that keeps our Police Department from being tied up making domestic trouble calls later as “a pound of cure”.

When the Revenue portion of the meeting shifted to Council comments, Commissioner Marilyn Schnell said she was dead set against raising Real Estate Taxes, but would not be opposed to looking at Red Light Cameras as a revenue source.  The county may be getting henky about municipalities putting cameras at “their” intersections, so stay tuned on that one.  Sandack is opposed to RLC for a variety of reasons.

Bruce Beckman disagreed with RLC, but favored a 1% restaurant tax on food and beverage.  As a consumption based tax, he rhetorically asked if an additional 27 cents would cause him to skip a $27 meal downtown with his better half.  Although Naperville has a 1.5% tax that hasn’t slowed down their dining, according to Sandack they are looking at substituting additional Home Rule Sales Tax instead, to get around the administrative costs of the restaurant tax.

Bob Barnett made the point that “for a sense of magnitude, we’re still spending $1 million we don’t have.  He did not, however, break out any homework from the “Barnett Challenge” he spoke about at council a couple weeks ago.  That may still be in the works, or much of it might already be in discussion.

Sean Durkin brought up vehicle stickers, which would capture revenue from renters as well as property owners with vehicles.

Sandack in his sum up closing thanked everyone for attending, and noted council and staff had also received many emails.  He said “We (council and staff) have a responsibility to our village.  This will be real difficult.  Please continue to participate.”

The next budget meeting is after the Tuesday October 6th Council Meeting.  On Saturday October 17, starting at 9:00am at Fire Station 2 (Main Street & 55th) is the first marathon workshop.  Those are usually all day events.