If the councilmembers were locked into a cell for three straight days,
would long-standing divisions yield to a newfound cooperation to escape, or
deteriorate into name-calling, fisticuffs and, oh my, even bloodshed? The safe
money is on the latter, but for assurity’s sake, the public can get a good
indication during this week’s annual budget deliberations – three full days of
fun, excitement, and maybe even violence, beginning Monday, September 11.
Heading up the bill is the Eric Mitchell/Ronney Reynolds tag-team, (ER for
short), who together have identified $9.9 million in potential budget cuts
during the past few months of rigorous budget preparation. Also featured will
be hard-hitter Brigid Shea, who has identified over $2 million in cuts herself.
The rest of the councilmembers are still wearing warm-ups.
The flash point this year is a pro-posed property tax increase of about
half a cent. The boost would raise about $1.2 million, costing the average
home-owner an extra $33.45 a year. Only Max Nofziger has offered to support the
tax proposal. Shea is waging a lonely public battle against the hike with her
proposed savings, but Reynolds and Jackie Goodman have also privately stated
that they support holding the line on taxes, and the rest of the elected body
is expected to agree.
Such an aspiration went from dubious to likely when the council decided
three weeks ago not to sell $8.4 million in bonds for the baseball stadium on
September 7. To begin with, the decision freed up $800,000 worth of debt
service that was scheduled for this fiscal year, allowing City Manager Jesus
Garza to drop his original 1cents tax increase to the smaller figure.
Moreover, the council’s decision created $1.6 million in orphan money, the
amount in sales tax revenue that would have helped pay for the stadium. Shea
wants to use the money to forego a property tax increase. City staff, however,
who seem to define necessity by the availability of dough, have already
identified one imperative project for the windfall: namely, the purchase of
right-of-way along Manchaca and Shiloh, a $2.5 mil-lion undertaking that staff
says is legally required since the city is expanding the roadway.
Another option for the surprise dinero calls for extending Lakeshore Drive,
an estimated $3.1 million endeavor that would provide access to the proposed
baseball stadium. That is, unless Capital Metro chooses to foot the bill in
exchange for free park-and-ride space at the proposed stadium parking lot, an
idea Garza is pitching around.
If the council chooses one of the projects, hope for tax restraint still
exists; Shea has found an additional $800,000 in property-tax-supported
programs to eliminate. The most controversial would save $120,000 in salary and
benefits by axing an assistant city manager. The rest of the council has
hesitated to back such a bureaucracy-shattering idea, but Shea insists it’s the
only logical result of transferring the city’s oversight of Brackenridge
Hospital to Seton Medical Center. “We’ve eliminated one of the biggest city
departments, and we’re seeing absolutely no impact [on management staff
levels].” A good candidate for the employment line, says Shea, would be the
newest assistant city manager, Jim Smith, who moved over from the head of
Planning and Development a year ago.
Another Shea proposal with higher probability would kill the $300,000
Employee Wellness Program, designed to promote healthy activities among
employees. Shea says the program is duplicated by most health insurance
companies, and city staff agree.
Shea’s are the only proposals that deal with reining in property taxes. But
Reynolds thinks he has an early Christmas gift for utility ratepayers. Like
Shea, he’s found $2.2 million. This time, the dollars would come from a utility
reserve in the Drainage Utility that city auditors say has no express purpose.
The cash, if you’ll pardon the pun, is a drop in the bucket compared to the
total amount of drainage utility reserves – $17.2 million – but according to
Reynolds’ formula, the recently discovered money would supplement the utility’s
Drainage Utility Fund, reducing the annual residential drainage fee from $45.84
to $39.60. “That’s the equivalent of over a 1% decrease in the property taxes,”
Reynolds exclaims proudly.
Shea says she will “consider” Reynolds’ proposition, but thinks it may be
part of a larger effort by Reynolds to kill the Drainage Utility. The
speculation’s not too far-fetched, considering that the ER duo regularly
criticize the utility, most notably when it was used to fund recent legal
battles over the Save Our Springs ordinance.
In fact, Reynolds called a press conference to get the word out about a
recent city audit faulting the Drainage Utility for financial misdirection on
Thursday, August 31, when he threatened a forthcoming attempt to kill the
utility if its managers don’t get a clue by this time next year.
Mitchell will undoubtedly support his partner’s cuts. And like Reynolds and
Shea, he’s gone high-profile with his own measures of fiscal prudence. One
attempt to transfer $7.7 million a year to police, fire, and EMS services by
wiping out water and energy conservation rebates died by a four-to-ER vote in
July (Todd abstained).
But Mitchell, who last year voted against a tax boost to raise $700,000 for
emergency services, hasn’t given up. Besides publicly accusing other
councilmembers of political rhetoric when it comes to public safety concerns,
Mitchell has asked the city manager for a five-year plan on the cost of
eliminating emergency vehicle backlogs and implementing “real” community
policing. If it takes a tax increase to carry out the plan, Mitchell’s all for
it. Despite all his hub-bub, though, he’s safe for now: the plan won’t be
presented until next year’s budget sessions.
If Shea and Reynolds’ cuts are approved by the council, they could create
at least $2.4 million worth of breathing space to help defray a tax increase,
and another $2.2 million to decrease utility fees, but the real fallout won’t
be known until some time next week. n This week in Council: A $47 mil-lion bond sale. Also, proposed amendment of
the City Code to require lobbyists to register as individuals, not as the
company they’re representing. This will help constrict the size of a lobbyist’s
campaign contributions.
This article appears in September 8 • 1995 and September 8 • 1995 (Cover).