The Tampa City Council Budget Process is Still Broken…Here’s One Fix I’d Recommend

First, let me be clear, this isn’t about where funds are spent. That’s a priority question and the whole point of a budget. You want to fund paving and I want to fund parks. What I’m talking about is the process by which we work that difference in priority out.

To extend the example and use simple round numbers, let’s say the mayor proposed $7 million for paving and $3 million for parks. By what process do I amend her proposal to budget $7 million for parks and $3 million for paving? Do I just say it enough times at workshops and the first budget hearing hoping that someone will make it happen?

Section 7.02 of the City of Tampa Charter makes it pretty clear this is the one time of the year^[1] Council can make changes.

The council is authorized to make such changes in said budget as it deems necessary for the proper and economical operation of the municipal government.

Currently there isn’t a real process to do that. This year, during the budget hearings, council made motions for changes they wanted to make. And contrary to their belief that they “amended the budget”, what they really did was compile a wish list of changes they are asking the administration to bring back as a financial resolution after the fiscal year starts. They didn’t actually amend anything. That’s the change I’m recommending they make.

First, the current process isn’t transparent to the public. Making last minute changes during the final budget hearing without any public input or scrutiny isn’t in anyone’s best interest. Second, as I’ve pointed out, they aren’t actually amending the budget, rather they are working off of a handshake deal with the admin to bring those changes back in a timely manner. Council Attorney Martin Shelby said as much at the end of the night: “my understanding is an agreement between the council and the administration that these motions tonight will be formalized in a financial resolution.” Chief Financial Officer Dennis Rogero’s answer: “October 15 would be lovely.” But there’s nothing that binds the mayor to do that or bring anything back exactly as proposed in a time frame council may expect. I’m not suggesting the current mayor and financial staff will do that, rather pointing out a potential scenario between a divided council and administration. But I have seen at least one example where something was said during a budget discussion that people interpreted as being changed or added only to learn later that technically it was only a suggestion and never put in writing.

Council Member Lynn Hurtak identified the problem at the first budget hearing on September 8: “We cannot pass this budget and have a handshake agreement that if [Amendment 3] doesn’t pass that the Mayor will add the deferred list back to the budget. We have all been there before.” She was talking about the deferred projects, but it applies to all of it. Two weeks later council adopted the budget 7-0 and was back there again. Not because anyone broke their word, but because there’s no process that doesn’t depend on it.

I’ll point to the addendum proposed by Council Chair Alan Clendenin as an example of what I’m talking about. Clendenin’s addendum doesn’t actually modify the budget, rather it requests quarterly revenue reports and states a position of Council that the first $10 million of revenue identified in the reviews that wasn’t accounted for in the budget go towards paving and sidewalks. Anything beyond the $10 million up to $30 million would go to parks. When Hurtak recommended that the specific account numbers used by the city for general resurfacing and sidewalk repair be used, discussion ensued with Shelby over the legalities of what they were doing. He explained that by just doing a verbal motion and vote, that in itself doesn’t suffice. In order for the addendum to travel with the budget for the mayor’s signature, the change needed to be made to a printed document that’s submitted to the clerk. Nothing formal was provided in writing to travel with the budget related to the so-called amendments. A printout of an on-the-fly spreadsheet doesn’t count.

I propose that Council adopt a rule or ordinance that would establish a formal procedure for proposing budget amendments. Simply, at any time up to the first budget hearing, a council member could file an amendment to the mayor’s proposed budget with the Clerk (they could be added to OnBase to travel with the “File” for the budget). The amendment would identify the purpose/justification with the funding source and the proposed change. Emphasis on funding source. That has been one of the biggest disconnects I’ve seen — council members not grasping that once the budget is proposed, it’s up to them to move the dollars if they want a change. If you didn’t communicate the desire for it to be funded prior to the budget proposal, you need to find the funding. If you did, and it wasn’t included, you especially need to find the funding.

During the first budget hearing, members would make the case for their amendments and they vote on each one. Anything that receives 4 votes moves forward.

That way, between the first and second hearing, all of the approved budget amendments could be compiled into a single document made available in advance of the final vote to allow for the public to have an opportunity to weigh in. A final vote on the package of amendments is held prior to budget adoption vote. There should probably be a mechanism to allow for amendments that were previously approved to be removed, or the funding request reduced — I do not think new spending should be proposed at the final hearing.

And just like how Council waited 30 minutes to finalize a document this year, they account for the time necessary to make any last minute changes that evening and the budget amendments travel with the budget for the mayor’s signature (or veto). No ambiguity as to what was approved and they all land in the final approved budget.

I’m not suggesting this is a silver bullet and will solve all the problems this city has with how the budget is crafted. But what it would do is establish a clear path for how to resolve differences and produce a better budget. Because sometimes, a handshake isn’t enough.