Faux City Manager John Shay Fails to Budget Money, Time Wisely

[XLFD]

On November 14, 2011 the City Council met for their first November meeting and the following was recorded in the minutes:  "A public hearing was set for 12/5/11 for the 2012 budget and capital improvement plan in the Council Chambers at City Hall at 6:30 p.m." 

The Ludington Daily News gave some details about this in Friday's paper on p. 1 and p. 3, but it has yet to be published on the City website nor has it been offered to be displayed publicly anywhere.  But here is what the City Charter says, the laws that are supposed to be followed in our democratic republic known as Ludington, Michigan.

 

A few notes: 

1)  Sec. 8.2 says the Budget for the next year should not only be presented to the City Council (and hence to the public) at the first meeting of November, as well as the City Manager's message about it.

2)  Researching LDN archives and older Council meetings shows that prior to John Shay's assumption of City Manager in 2003, former City Manager Jim Miller had the budget prepared for the council by the first meeting of November, and that they discussed it in earnest the next meeting, this includes 2002, when it was already decided he would not be rehired for 2003.

3)  John Shay did the proper budget procedure in 2003, but the very next year he waited until the first December meeting to present the budget and the message.  Ever since that year, the budget and message has either been presented at the first meeting in December or the last November meeting.  This violates sec. 8.2, and often allows only one meeting to review this budget, and less than two weeks for the public to review it, before the last council meeting before the next fiscal year.

4)  Sec. 8.3 says various things must be addressed by the CM about the budget in the first meeting of November.  He hasn't made any such message yet, but may tomorrow?

 

Notes from here: 

1)  Sec. 8.11 says that the capital program is to be presented no later than the final date for submission of the budget, which is the first meeting in November.  John Shay has failed to do that in each of his years since 2003.

2)  By sec. 8.11, this program needs to address 5 things in its content.  In the past, this hasn't been done in a timely or rigorous manner.

3)  By sec. 8.12, the City Council has a duty to let the public know where and when  to view the capital program in the Daily News back in November.  Unless it evaded my perusal, this has not been done.

 

Again, instead of allowing the public to inspect either of these records that should have been available on November 14, City Hall has disallowed any serious review of the budget or capital program by introducing them in December, contrary to the laws they have written and should be enforcing. 

 

Furthermore, the budget numbers from last year's projected budget for 2012 differ greatly than Shay's current numbers for that year, which can sometimes be expected, but he didn't bother explaining why in the LDN article.  For instance, he said that water funds revenues are estimated at $1,445,500 for 2012 with expenditures at $1,845,300 and that sewer revenues are at $1,248,900 and expenses at $1,445,000  p. 3. 

In the Budget for 2011-- the 2012 budget has not been posted anywhere I can go-- the water revenues and expenses are at $1,485,700 (p. 62) and $1,547,900 (p. 64) a difference of $60,000 instead of this year's estimated $400,000.  Where's the $340,000 difference coming from?

Page 65 says that Sewer revenues would be $1,934,000 and expenses should be $1,790,900 (p. 67), a surplus of about $150,000 instead of the $200,000 deficit now envisioned.  A difference of about the same amount $350,000. 

 

I am probably never going to receive a valid and lawful explanation about why the $700,000 change in just these two estimates of two parts of the budget has happened, and of course, by the time I might, this beast of a budget will have already went forth.  That's what happens when you have only two weeks to act, rather than 6 or 7 weeks.

 

[Marty Redman]

When John Shay took the oath of office he swore to follow and enforce the laws of the land and so he should be getting that budget, the capital paln, and the budget message out by the that first November meeting. 

 

What--- no oath of office.  That explains a great deal.  Shows a lot when the city commissioners let it slide.  These guys know precisely whats going on and they show their a bunch of lawless bastards like Shay is; deeply enmeshed in their own graft and corruption.

[XLFD]

Though I would fain use as strong language as you have, Marty, I would admit your deductions seem sound.  Why do no city councilors nor the Mayor demand that the laws on the budget and capital plan are followed?   Do they not want to vet the budget or have any open discussions on what should be addressed?

 

From what I've seen in these December meetings, that second answer must be no, and the first answer must fall in the realm of illegality and, likely, corruption.

[Willy]

The Council thinks the laws are just guidelines and are not mandatory. Shay has probably convinced them that this type of thinking is OK. Ludington has a group of arrogant Councilors who consider themselves above the law.  It's no wonder X is having such a difficult time dealing with these people.