The City of Crest Hill has passed a budget that shows the sad state of affairs in the city. The mayor decided earlier this year that a finance committee was not necessary since a City Administrator had been hired. So the City Administrator brought a budget to the City that was over $1.5 million in the red. After slashing and raising fees and rates, it was passed still over $1 million short. So this is what is accomplished without a finance committee. How very sad. I hope the mayor is proud of his brilliant idea.
Some of the blame rests at the City Administrator's feet as well though. He is the one that brought a budget so out of line to the Council in the first place. When I served as a City Administrator, I would never have even considered bringing the City Council an unbalanced budget. And that certainly was not easy in a city that had seen its finances destroyed by years of poor spending and embezzlement. In fact, my aim was to have a budget that had 3% surplus and then to be able to work during the year to keep spending below budget and revenue above it. Even the most fiscally irresponsible person can put together a budget that is over a million dollars short of balancing. However, I believe that a City Administrator is a professional who should bring with them a set of skills in matters such as finance.
The third person bearing some responsibility here is the City Treasurer. While, I have seen nothing to indicate that he is not fulfilling his duties as specified, I think at this time Crest Hill needs something more. I feel that the City Treasurer needs to stand up and be the voice of moderation and reform. I call on him to watch every cent of the budget and not to release a cent of it that is not specifically budgeted. This type of discipline is the best we can hope for the coming months. He also should publicly release all the financial data of the City. This would allow citizens to know what is really going on and may help to spur a public demand for reform. Finally, the Treasurer needs to take a stand and be a leader pushing for fiscal responsibility even beyond what is role is. He should use his office to pound at the problem and keep it on the front burner. He should lead the call for change.
The City Council should never have approved a budget that sends Crest Hill closer to financial ruin. However, they had to work with a budget proposal that was badly out of balance, they lacked input through a finance committee, and they were threatened that State funding would be lost if a budget was not passed before the end of July. If I were in their place, I would have insisted on passing a bare bones balanced budget and then amended it after August 1st.
In summary, Mayor Churnovic and the City Administrator should have been the leaders of improving Crest Hill, instead the City is facing unprecedented financial difficulties because of the choices and actions of these two officials. It is sad that the time for change has come so soon.
Showing posts with label city administrator. Show all posts
Showing posts with label city administrator. Show all posts
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Citizen Involvement
The City of Crest Hill has few opportunities for citizen involvement in government and has reduced those opportunities in recent months. There once were Road Improvements and Budget committees, but Mayor Churnovic has eliminated those. This is the wrong direction to be moving.
Mayor Churnovic used the excuse that now that there is a City Administrator in place, there is not a need for the committees. I do not understand why citizen involvement is being replaced by the City Administrator. I did not think that Crest Hill was getting rid of democracy, but that is what appears to be happening.
I certainly do not oppose the hiring of a City Administrator and was previously employed by a different city as their City Administrator. The city I worked for actually used the hiring of a City Administrator to facilitate more citizen involvement. Their logic was that a City Administrator could coordinate more meetings of committees and allow committees to be citizen run with far less involvement by City Council members. This increase in citizen involvement was an absolutely positive situation for the city.
City Council members cannot effectively control every aspect of city government, they simply do not have the time. It also is not a good idea to concentrate too much power in just a few people. Committees are an effective way to get more citizens involved in issues that they care about. An individual may not be very concerned about how the police department is run, but may be very concerned about the conditions of our streets; while another person wants to see improvements made in how the city budgets, but has no interest in zoning issues. Committees dealing with specific areas of city government would allow each of these people to be involved and contributing to improving the city.
The alternative to citizen involvement is to concentrate the power in the hands of a few elected officials and entrust the City Administrator to handle all matters that the Mayor or City Council do not have time for or the ability to handle. This seems to be anti-democratic though and a step in the wrong direction. I would like to see more committees, more discussion, and more citizen involvement.
Mayor Churnovic used the excuse that now that there is a City Administrator in place, there is not a need for the committees. I do not understand why citizen involvement is being replaced by the City Administrator. I did not think that Crest Hill was getting rid of democracy, but that is what appears to be happening.
I certainly do not oppose the hiring of a City Administrator and was previously employed by a different city as their City Administrator. The city I worked for actually used the hiring of a City Administrator to facilitate more citizen involvement. Their logic was that a City Administrator could coordinate more meetings of committees and allow committees to be citizen run with far less involvement by City Council members. This increase in citizen involvement was an absolutely positive situation for the city.
City Council members cannot effectively control every aspect of city government, they simply do not have the time. It also is not a good idea to concentrate too much power in just a few people. Committees are an effective way to get more citizens involved in issues that they care about. An individual may not be very concerned about how the police department is run, but may be very concerned about the conditions of our streets; while another person wants to see improvements made in how the city budgets, but has no interest in zoning issues. Committees dealing with specific areas of city government would allow each of these people to be involved and contributing to improving the city.
The alternative to citizen involvement is to concentrate the power in the hands of a few elected officials and entrust the City Administrator to handle all matters that the Mayor or City Council do not have time for or the ability to handle. This seems to be anti-democratic though and a step in the wrong direction. I would like to see more committees, more discussion, and more citizen involvement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
