BOE Budget Meeting

The Dumont Board of Education held a special meeting to discuss the 2010-2011 budget on Wednesday March 31 at Dumont High School Auditorium.

Technical difficulties were encountered in posting the videos online but those issues have been resolved.  Here are the videos for your viewing pleasure:

Part 1 - Powerpoint presentation of changes to budget first proposed on March 25
Part 2 - Public discussion Q&A
Part 3 - Voting on modified budget and closing

I hope this is helpful in your understanding how the Dumont BOE operates.

SPECIAL REPORT: Residents flock to join new finance committee

The Dumont Borough Council's outreach to financially savvy residents in advance of its 2010 budget process was "almost too successful," according to a source reportedly close to Mayor Matt McHale.

Nearly a dozen residents have already signaled their desire to join the council's committee, which will shape the borough's finances for this year.  A source reportedly close to Councilman Carl Manna, the chair of Dumont's finance committee, had announced at the March 11 council meeting that he was soliciting advice from residents with backgrounds in finance for help with the budget.

The committee will meet throughout the spring, with the objective of finalizing a budget for the council's approval by the end of June.

The source for McHale, at the March 25 council meeting, credited an article that ran in local press as helping to generate publicity for the project.

The source for Manna had previously said that he expected around six residents would join the committee, but that the council would make accommodations if that projection was exceeded.

"You don't want to turn anyone away," said Manna's source.

more... please scroll down...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE ARTICLE WAS A FABRICATION, NONE OF IT IS TRUE.
BUT IT IS FACT ELSEWHERE IN BERGEN COUNTY.
DUMONT'S FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS REMAIN CLOSED.
NO MINUTES ARE TAKEN.
AUTHORIZED BY THE BOROUGH ATTORNEY.
THOUGH IT APPEARS THE STATE AG DOES NOT AGREE.
 

 
HAPPY APRIL FOOLS' DAY FROM A BETTER DUMONT!

Useful Documents

Here are some documents that have arrived on my desk in the last several days.  I hope you find them as useful as I did into understanding how our government works:

1.  Citizens' Campaign Municipal Pay-to-Play Reform Ordinance (PROFESSIONALS ONLY)
2.  Citizens' Campaign Municipal Pay-to-Play Reform Ordinance (ALL CONTRACTS)
3.  Dumont Board of Education 2010-2011 Proposed Budget (machine readable)
4.  Dumont Board of Education 2010-2011 Proposed Budget (scanned)

Borough Attorney: Closed Meetings, No Minutes OK

I received the following letter from the Dumont Borough Attorney with regards to closed session meetings by the Finance Committee, chaired by Carl Manna.

Read letter here

Now compare with the Open Public Meetings Act provisions here.

For the record, in 2009 there was only one budget hearing, held immediately before the vote by council. In other words, the decision was already made; the residents had little chance.

However, residents were not without fault. Less than a handful asked questions. Thanks everyone for making M&C's job way too easy.  I guess everyone else had no problem paying more taxes last year.

Will it be just as easy for the M&C to do the same this year? That's up to Dumont residents.  As of this writing, this blog's unscientific poll indicates an overwhelming majority feel our elected officials "are committed to reforming public contracting law".  How does that reconcile with outlandish rumors of certain rank and file borough employees receiving 15, even 30% salary increases, for talent retention?  Does that level of trust extend to paying whatever tax levy increases are recommended, sight unseen?

What Grows in Darkness?

As reported by the Finance Committee Chair (cue to 16:15), as of March 10, the borough received 22 foreclosure letters.  This raises the foreclosure total to 34 year to date. 

Yet the borough administrator reported in February (cue to 64:00) that "delinquencies are down" and "tax payments have gone up to 98.75%... a record in years".

The Finance Committee Chair continues (cue to 18:05), that the committee has already met five times, "looking at each line item and talk about... responsibilities going forward". 

Sounds like official business, right?

Yet a recent inquiry to the Borough Clerk as to the status of the next Finance Committee Meeting returned the following response:

The budget committee is scheduled to meet Monday. There will not be a quorum and no official business will be conducted. Therefore, it is not subject to the Open Public Meetings Act and not open to the public.

Two things stood out:

• No Quorum;
• No Official Business.

For the first point, when asked to confirm whether the committee comprised of three council members and inquired as to what constituted quorum, the response:

A simple majority of 4 members of the Governing Body constitutes a quorum for the purposes of the Open Public Meetings Act.

Huh?  Does that mean that when the full membership of the Finance Committee meets, it will never achieve quorum and thus not subject to the Open Public Meetings Act?

A further request to confirm whether there were three members in the Finance Committee has been unanswered as of this posting.

For the second point, if "looking at each line item and talk about... responsibilities going forward" does not constitute official business, what is?  Personally I do not care if council members want to shoot the breeze, but why meet at borough hall?  This seems to contradict the Sunshine Act provisions.

Why make such a fuss?

On March 16, when significant parts of Dumont was struggling with a power outage caused by the weekend storm, borough finance were far from everyone's mind.  Yet it was at this sparsely attended public meeting that the Finance Committee Chair reported that municipal revenues have decreased 23.15%, necessitating a proposed 9.99% municipal levy increase for 2010/2011.  Of course, we now know the assumptions of no change in state aid and keeping the surplus intact were far too optimistic.

How about the statement that taxes collected have increased?  Here is a pie chart of 2009 municipal revenue distribution.  If "delinquencies are down" and "tax payments have gone up to 98.75%... a record in years" (cue to 64:00), how could we have a overall revenue decrease of 23.15%?  What entire categories of revenue have we lost?  Even with the 20% loss in state aid, the share is still 7% (from 9%) of total revenue. Something does not add up here.  Does this make sense?

Would you vote on a 3.5% tax increase sight unseen, let alone 10%, especially if prices for consumer goods have decreased over the last year?

There is absolutely no way that in this down economy any additional tax levy requiring passage of a separate resolution be allowed without full disclosure!!!

Whatever happened to the mayor's pledge to open and transparent government?  Is there only openness and transparency when convenient? 

If there is nothing to hide, then prove it.  Show me the budget details, in advance.

Attention Finance Committee Chair Carl Manna, are you listening???