It’s budget season for the City of Whitewater, running into November, and in this post I’ll offer a few overview remarks. Subsequent posts will consider aspects of the budget in greater detail.
The City of Whitewater’s Budget, not Whitewater, Wisconsin’s Budget. A bit of perspective — something lacking in past years — is in order. This is the budget for the City of Whitewater, one entity in a city of hundreds of businesses and organizations, and thousands of people. There have been nearly ten years of ‘the City this’ and ‘the City that,’ as though our local government and the entire city were one in the same.
The absurdity of that puffed-up view was an embarrassment to the community, and led to instance after instance of over-reaching that only embarrassed our community further. City government has a necessary instrumental place within the city, but no more than an instrumental one, to effect the limited goals of her residents. There’s nothing organic about local government – it’s not a living creature, but rather a collection of people paid through the earnings of thousands of others for specific purposes.
The draft operations budget is one of nine-million ($9,199,310) for a city of fourteen thousand. Even in these times when everything in Madison or Washington seems to start high and go higher, that’s still a lot of money.
One-Hundred Fifty Pages. One shouldn’t doubt how bureaucratic even the smallest places in America have become: it takes one-hundred fifty pages simply to outline the budget for a small Midwestern town. Yet it’s all worth reading — as I have from cover to cover — because there is nothing that this government spends that should be hidden from the residents from whom its authority truly derives.
A Draft. This budget’s a draft proposal, as it should be. It’s an opening offer from one part of the government (the full-time municipal manager and his administration) to another part (the elected representatives of the city’s people). One part proposes, one part disposes, so to speak.
Along the way, there may be changes here or there, but the idea of changes shouldn’t bother anyone. It’s part of a routine process. Two years ago, I think, there was great fuss and huffing from the then-city manager that he was not told about Council’s intentions, and so had to rework his budget. There’s a rumor – unconfirmed to be sure – that one could hear the whining all the way to Palmyra. Needless to say, he should have made better inquiries as part of his job.
Yet, in any event, there was no reason for indignation: one should be flexible and industrious enough to make adjustments with equanimity.
The sky won’t fall for the sake of changes.
Highlighted Alternatives. In three areas, City Manager Clapper expressly highlights funding alternatives: for Downtown Whitewater, for Generac’s taxpayer-subsidized bus line, and for money to fight the Emerald Ash Borer. (In a way, the whole budget’s a series of alternatives, but these are highlighted because spending for some depends at the first instance on reductions elsewhere to maintain a balanced budget proposal .)
There’s no year that doesn’t involve choices; these are simply the most obvious among them.
Tax Incremental Financing. Here’s the elephant in the room, far bigger than any highlighted alternatives of this budget. The last municipal administration went drunk with Tax Incremental Districts, only to vomit a foul mess back on the residents of this city. In all Wisconsin, even during the Great Recession, only a tiny percentage of cities and towns saw their tax incremental districts fall into distressed status.
Whitewater has a long-term anchor tied to her because of the over-use of these districts, and it will be years of trouble yet ahead. I’ve sympathy for those who are stuck cleaning this up.
Tomorrow: The first part of the budget and the TID albatross.
