HomeMy WebLinkAbout91-0620S
COMMON COUNCIL
CITY HALL, BUFFALO N.Y.
SPECIAL SESSION
JUNE 20, 1991
at: 4:00 P.M.
Present- George K. Arthur, President of the Council and Councilmembers:
Bakos, Bell, Collins, Coppola, Fahey, Franczyk, Higgins, LoTempio, Peoria,
Pitts, Rutecki. - 12.
Absent- Councilmember -Amos.- 1.
No. 1
Mr. Charles L. Michaux, III
City Clerk
1308 City Hall
Buffalo, New York
Dear Mr. Michaux:
Pursuant to Section 30 of the Charter of the City of Buffalo, upon the
written request of five Council Members of the City of Buffalo, dated June 18,
1991, presented to you herewith, I hereby call a Special Meeting of the Common
Council, to be held in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Buffalo, New York, on
June 20, 1991 at 4:00 PM. for the following purpose:
(l) To receive, consider and take appropriate action
on the Mayor's vetoes of the 1991-92 budget.
RECEIVED AND FILED
Hon. George K. Arthur
President of the Council
1315 City Hall
Buffalo, New York
Dear Sir:
WE, the undersigned, members of the Common Council, hereby request that
you call a Special Meeting of the Common
Council, pursuant to Section 30 of the Charter of the City of Buffalo,
for the following purpose:
(1) To receive, consider and take appropriate action
on the Mayor's vetoes of the 1991-92 budget.
We request that this Special Meeting be held on June 20, 1991 at 4:00 PM.
Alfred T. Coppola
David P. Rutecki
Rosemarie LoTempio
Carl A. Perla, Jr.
James W. Pitts
Pursuant to Rule 2 of the Rules of Order of the Common Council of the
City of Buffalo each of the following named members of the Common Council, to
wit:
ARCHIE L. AMOS, JR. DAVID FRANCZYK NORMAN M. BAKOS CARL A. PERLA, JR. CLIFFORD
BELL BRIAN HIGGINS DAVID A. COLLINS ROSEMARIE LoTEMPIO ALFRED T. COPPOLA JAMES
W. PITTS EUGENE M. FAHEY DAVID P. RUTECKI
hereby states that he received twenty-four (24) hours notice of the time and
purpose of the Special Meeting of the Common Council duly called to be held on
June 20, 1991 at 4:00 PM.
STATE-NEW YORK)
COUNTY OF ERIE ) ss:
CITY OF BUFFALO
On this 19th day of June 1991, before me the subscribers, person ally appeared
Alfred T. Coppola, David Rutecki, Rosemarie LoTempio, Carl A.Perla,Jr.,
Clifford Bell, Eugene M. Fahey, David Collins, Norman Bakos, David Franczyk ,
James Pitts.
to me known to be the same persons described in and who executed the foregoing
instrument, and they duly and severally acknowledged to me that they executed
the same.
Richard F. Okoniewski
Commissioner or Deeds, in and or the City of Buffalo, N.Y.
1 My commission expires 12/31/92
TO EACH MEMBER OF THE COMMON COUNCIL:
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that, pursuant to Section 30 of the Charter of
the City of Buffalo, upon the written request of five Council Members, dated
June 18, 1991 the HON. GEORGE K. ARTHUR, President of the Council, has called a
Special Meeting of the Common Council,to be held in the Council Chambers, City
Hall, Buffalo, New York, on June 20, 1991 at 4:00 PM. for the following
purpose:
(l) To receive, consider and take appropriate action on the Mayor's vetoes
of the 1991-92 budget.
Yours very truly,
CHARLES L. MICHAUX, III
CITY CLERK
No. 2
Vetoes 1991-92 Budget
Item #17, C.C.P., June 10, 1991
I have received and reviewed the changes made by Your Honorable
Body to my 1991-92 recommended budget. You have reappropriated $7 million from
areas I had recommended funding to your own priorities. Unfortunately, in a
number of areas it is not simply a difference of priorities but a failure on
your part to adequately fund certain accounts.
In your haste to find funds for your preferences you have made a number
of imprudent budget cuts. The City Charter does not allow me to veto the
deletions you have made. However, I feel it is necessary, with or without
additional state aid, to restore funding to a number of areas you have
indiscriminately slashed.
Governor Cuomo ' s 1991-92 State budget contained a devastating $28
million cut in total State aid to Buffalo. The State legislature passed a
budget that would have provided an additional $6.6 million to the City and $8.4
million to the Buffalo Board of Education. However, Governor Cuomo has vetoed
this additional aid to Buffalo and it appears unlikely the legislature will
override his vetoes. At this time it is uncertain how much, if any, additional
aid Buffalo will receive when the State budget is finalized.
Some of the major reductions made by Your Honorable Body and the minimum
amounts I feel should be restored include:
Amount Recommended
Category Cut Restoration
Capital Outlays $1,036,041 $1,200,000
4th% Attrition
Requirement 1,032,625 1,032,625
Judgment & Claims 837,519 737,519
Street Lighting Acct . 395,000 350,000 Salt for
Ice & Snow Removal 130,000 100,000
Buffalo Convention Ctr
Mgmt Corp 150,000 75,000
Misc. Travel, Supplies, Subscription
& Printing 295,000 100,000
Inventory & Stores Parts & 120,000 50,000 Legal
Fees 90,000 35,000
Various Water Cuts 1,036,000 400,000
16 City Jobs 338,705- 0
Certiorari 300,000 -0
Various Other Accounts (includes deferral of building & equipment
repairs) 545,000 100.000
TOTAL $7,105,890 $4,180,144
By reducing every department's salary accounts by an additional l% you
have reduced the authorized city workforce by another 37 positions. This
maneuver results in funding for 10 less police officers than you claimed you
added. In other words your budget provides enough funding for only 10 more
police officers (not 20) than I had included in my recommended budget.
Below are items that I am vetoing or providing comment on why I am not
vetoing them:
I. Capital Budget Items:
I am vetoing all the capital budget items added by Your Honorable Body
for which no debt service funding was provided. This includes everything but
the $2,350,000 for the planning of a new sports arena for which you added
$85,000 in debt service payments.
The 1986 Tax Reform Law prohibits municipalities from selling bonds for
projects unless they are ready to proceed with the project. Since you have
added these projects without providing any debt service funds to allow for the
sale of bonds to implement them it is obvious they are not yet ready to go. It
is unfair to mislead the public by including these projects in the capital
budget when, in fact, they are unplanned and unfunded. It is also a cause for
concern to credit rating agencies when a municipality has a high volume of
authorized but unissued bonds for capital projects. The City cannot afford to
carry this high level of debt in future years.
The projects I am vetoing are:
COUNCIL ADDITIONS TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET
Division of Engineering
University & South District Sidewalks & Curbs
$ 200,000
(Barcher Place $50,000)
(South - Various $150,000)
University & Niagara Lighting $ 100,000
(Davidson St. $50,000)
(Days Park $50,000)
Installation of Traffic Signals
Timon & Best Sts $ 80,000
Sight-Impaired Traffic Signal - 120 Central Ave. $ 50,000
Division of Buildings
Kleinhans Music Hall Reconstruction
(Plumbing & drainage improvements) $ 658,000
Acquire/Reconstruct P.U.A. Building
761 Fillmore Avenue 200,000
Community Center - 889 Kensington Avenue $ 200,000
Monument Reconstruction $ 150,000
Inspections & Community Revitalization
Demolition of and Repairs to City-Owned Bldgs $ 1,200,000
Departmentof Community Development
South & Fillmore District Park Improvements $ 235,000
(Caz Casino Park $150,000)
(Gus Franczyk Park $35,000)
(Fillmore Parks $50,000)
Citywide Tree Planting $ 100,000
Acquire/Construct/Reconstruct Love joy District Bldgs$ 150,000
Acquire/Construct/Reconstruct Love joy District Parks$ 150,000
New Masten District Community Center $ 300,000
Scajaquada Pathway - Phase II $ 221,000
Masten District Playground Improvements $ 300,000
War Memorial Site $ 1,000,000
University District Parks & Playgrounds $ 100,000
(McCarthy Park $50,000)
(Ken/Lang/Tower Playground $50,000)
Niagara District Park Improvements $ 300,000
(Arlington $150,000)
(Broderick Park $150,000)
King Urban Life Center $ 150,000
Ellicott District Improvements $ 120,000
(Johnson Park $20,000)
(Johnson Playground $50,000)
(William/Emslie YMCA $50,000)
Towpath Park - Foot of Hertel $ 204,000
Shakespeare in the Park Stage - Delaware Park $ 300,000
Community Center - Polk Bros.Bldg.
(2038-2050 Genesee St.) $ 950,000
Main St. R.O.W. Improvements Fountain Plaza $ 250,000
Tax Increment Financing Projects
Walden Park Housing Infrastructure $ 950,000
St. Columbus Square Infrastructure $ 500,000
Austin Park Infrastructure $ 750.000
TOTAL ADDS TO GENERAL FUN
D $ 9,868,000
Board of Education
Building Maintenance & Reconstruction
$
300,
000
Handicapped Access Improvements $ 125,000
Cafeteria Construction Supplemental
Funding (Schools 33 & 74) $ 860.000
TOTAL ADDS TO BOARD OF EDUCATION
$ 1,265,000
GRAND TOTAL OF ADDS
$11,153.000
II. General Fund - City
Dept./Div/Function
01-0-001 Common Council
Account #449 - Miscellaneous Supplies $11,477
REMARKS I am vetoing this $11,477
addition to the Common
Council's
budget because I do not believe it is necessary. While your Honorable Body
often discussed the need for everyone to share the pain in the 1991-92 budget
you managed to spare yourselves. You did not delete your own pay raises as I
had requested and you maintained over $200,000 in legislative contingency
accounts to hire outside consultants and pay tuition for your staff to attend
college courses. While you nickeled and dimed the departments to death, leaving
Commissioners and Directors with no travel funds to conduct essential City
business and eliminating funding for items like Polk and Haines directories and
monthly supplements to NYS Consolidated Laws and NYS Comptroller's legal
opinions, you allocated $4,377 for travel for each Councilmember ($6,500 for
the Council President). This includes $1,827 for the $9 daily allowance
received for the use of your personal vehicles.
I am vetoing the $11,477 you have added for miscellaneous supplies
because you have not provided any explanation of its intended use.
04-0-001 Comptroller's Office
110 - Salaries - Regular
1 Resource Development Technician $33,013
REMARKS I am vetoing the transfer of this position from the Police
department to the Comptroller's office. The position originally existed in the
Division of Urban Affairs. I was advised the duties of the Division of Urban
Affairs could be performed by the Departments of Human Resources general office
and Civil Service without the use of this job title. Since the Police
department had requested this same job title be added to their budget to assist
them in preparing state and federal grant applications I recommended
transferring the incumbent from Urban Affairs to Police. When Your Honorable
Body decided to restore the Division of Urban Affairs you should have either
included this job title there or kept it in Police. Instead you transferred it
to the Comptroller's Office.
The Comptroller's office has no apparent need for a Resource Development
Technician. Sustaining this veto would retain the position in the Police
department. I am aware the incumbent is seeking elective office and therefore
is prohibited by the Federal Hatch Act from working in a department that
receives federal funds, but that is not sufficient justification for creating a
job in a department where it is not needed.
21-0-013 Fire Boat Service
110 - Salaries - Regular $435,984
1 Marine Oiler, 4 Ass't Marine Engineers,
4 Marine Engineers & 4 Masters of the
Fireboat
114 - Overtime 25,000
121 - Acting Time 3,000
124 - Meal Time Allowance 32,790
125 - Longevity 2,800
430 - Fuel for Heat & Power 8,600
432 - Janitorial 500
449 - Miscellaneous 300
452 - Gasoline & Lubricants 300
462 - Mach & Equip Maint Materials 25
463 - Mach & Equip Repair Materials 2,000
464 - Electric & Electronic Supplies 50
523 - Repairs to Equip & Machinery 1,000
TOTAL $522,349
REMARKS I am vetoing the $522,349 you have appropriated to restore the
operation of the fireboat because I would rather see the tax increase reduced
than have it used to fund this operation. I believe more efficient
arrangements could be made to continue the services now provided by the
fireboat. Fire Commissioner Paul Shanks has informed you of the limitations of
the existing fireboat, the low volume of calls it responds to, the high cost of
staffing it and the advantages of acquiring the amphibious vehicle included in
the capital budget.
50-0-003-Departmentof Human Resources
110 - Salaries - Regular $49,182
l Clerk $18,771
1 Program Manager $30,411
REMARKS I am vetoing the restoration of these two positions because the
Commissioner of Human Resources, Don Allen, believes the services of his
department will not be diminished if these jobs are eliminated. Because a job
is filled is not sufficient justification to continue funding it in the City
budget. Changing times and conditions require adjustments in staffing levels
and taxpayers cannot be expected to fund jobs a department head says are not
necessary
Grants-In-Aid
$2,803,972
REMARKS There are a number of reasons I did not include funding in my
recommended budget for this purpose and why I disagree with the amount you have
added. As I have stated on numerous occasions, under the 1977 amendment to the
Erie County Sales Tax Revenue Distribution Agreement the County made a
commitment to provide 11.4% of the annual yield from the 3% sales tax revenue
to libraries and cultural and public benefit grants. In 1991 the County budget
provides $5.2 million less than the 11.4% target. In 1990 there was a $3.8
million funding deficiency by the County.
If the County would only meet its obligation under the distribution
agreement the grant-in-aid recipients could be fully funded without receiving a
City appropriation. Given the difficult 1991-92 budget the City faced because
of the $28 million reduction in State aid it was my opinion the City could no
longer afford to bail the County out of its obligations.
The other objection I have to this amount being added to the City budget
is that it was done at the expense of the City departments. Departments, under
the Council budget, will be required to operate with a further 1% reduction in
personnel lines, no employee pay raises, and with the exception of Police and
Fire, no funding to purchase new operating equipment to carry out their
functions. One of the biggest problems I found when I became Mayor in 1977 was
that departments did not have the proper equipment such as snowplows, garbage
packers, parks equipment, dump trucks for pothole repairs, parking violation
vehicles, etc. I believe your decision to eliminate these items from the
budget is shortsighted.
I realize that vetoing these grants-in-aid will not restore the cuts with
which I disagree. I am not vetoing the additions you have made to
Grants-In-Aid but I recommend the contracts with these agencies include a
provision to allow a reduction of the grant if such reduction is needed to
avoid a City budget deficit.
Board of Education 'General Fund
III.
Operation and Maintenanc
e $1,500,000
REMARKS I have also decided not to veto the $1.5 million addition you
made to the Board of Education budget. I attempted to treat the Board and City
sides of the budget fairly. Because of the loss in State aid I recommended
that both budgets remain at approximately last year's level. The decision by
Your Honorable Body to take $1.5 million from the City budget to fund the Board
of Education results in the City receiving a budget that is less than last year
while the Board of Education now realizes a slight growth. I do not question
that the Board faces a tough budget year even with this increase but I do not
think the City side of the budget should be decreased below last year's level
in order to provide an increase to the Board.
However, again I realize that the cuts on the City side cannot be
restored by vetoing this addition to the Board of Education so I have chosen
not to veto the addition.
SUMMARY
In total I have vetoed:
I. Capital Projects Fund $11,153,000
II. General Fund City 616,021
III. General Fund Board of Education- 0-
The veto of the Capital Projects Fund will not impact the property tax
rate since these projects are funded by the sale of bonds and not by the
general operating budget. The reason I have vetoed the projects is that Your
Honorable Body failed to appropriate any operating funds to pay for the debt
service costs of selling the bonds that would be necessary to implement these
projects.
The $616,021 vetoed in the general fund, if sustained, would reduce the
property tax levy increase needed to balance the budget by approximately .5%.
These are expenses I believe, for the reasons mentioned above, do not need to
be part of the taxpayer's burden in the 1991-92 budget.
I have kept my vetoes to a minimum because I believe the weakness in the
budget that has been adopted lies not so much in what is in the budget but in
what has been left out. Unfortunately, I have no power to veto the cuts that
Your Honorable Body has made.
I ask Your Honorable Body to sustain the vetoes I have made.
Mr. Fahey moved to Override the Mayor's Vetoes of Item No. 17, C.C.P.,
6/10/91,-1991-1992 Budget.
Seconded by Mr. Franczyk.
REPASSED
No. 3
Adjournment
At 4:08 P.M. Mr. Fahey moved to adjourn. Seconded by Mr. Pitts.
Charles L. Michaux, III
City Clerk