Dishonesty in Budgeting

Three aldermen voted “no” on the city budget motion this evening: Sandy Weidner, Jeff Coe and Mike Shields. All I can say is, “Good for them.”

I don’t think any of them voted that way for the same reason I objected to the budget: dishonesty. But they didn’t like the budget for philosophical reasons and at least had the gumption to vote that way also.

Once again we will find a new fee on our tax statements while Mayor John Dickert and the aldermen tout a “no tax increase” budget.

It isn’t a “no tax increase” if you treat the budget honestly:
1. The new fee, the recycling fee, is a tax. It can legally be called a fee because the tax is going into a separate fund controlled by the Department of Public Works. It doesn’t go into the general fund first. But other than that little short cut, it is the same as a tax.
2. Recycling is a function of garbage disposal. As such it is a function of DPW and all expenses thereof should be part of the DPW budget and the tax levy.

That is my paramount objection to this budget and it should not be passed in this misleading and dishonest form.

It should be not passed with the misleading and dishonest Sewer Lateral fee attached to it. Sewer laterals have been the jurisdiction of DPW for a long time…probably since they were installed.

Why now a fee to deal with them?

That fee should also be repealed and sewer lateral maintenance put back into the general fund.

Until both those fees are eliminated, we do not have an honest budget and it should not be passed.

There are other reasons to not pass this budget, but this is one of the fundamental reasons: dishonesty in budgeting.