Waste of Taxpayer Money?
Council’s Legislative & Finance Committee (L&F) met before the July 27th council meeting.
Based on his mid-year financial analysis, Councilman Leo Lombardo (the L&F chair) reported that the city is running “$ 154,000 in the red.” While the city’s actual revenue exceeded the revenue projections in the 2010 budget, the city’s expenses are running 4 % above the budgeted expense amount.
While Finance Director Anthony Ianiro initially attempted to dispute Councilman Lombardo’s figures by excluding previously encumbered amounts from the expense side (encumbered money is money that hasn’t actually been paid out yet but has been set aside to pay prior commitments and/or pending bills), he later conceded that Lombardo’s figures were accurate. Both Tony Ianiro and Mayor Scott Coleman quickly pointed out that it was likely that not all of the encumbered funds would actually be spent, which could lower the final deficit figure.
Finance Director Tony Ianiro was asked about, but was unable to explain, a $ 8,912 charge for “park land and land improvement” that was paid for out of the city’s “401” capital improvements budget. Ianiro had not mentioned that charge when discussing the “401” fund with council during the budgeting process last February, and it was not on the list of council-approved capital improvement projects for 2010.
In response to a question by Councilwoman Cathy Murphy, the Finance Director was also unable to explain why he had been paying property taxes and city-levied street light and/or sewer assessments on two parcels of property that the city owns (the Old Church Building property and a vacant lot just east of the Municipal Park entrance). Because they are city-owned, those properties should be exempt from property taxes ---and presumably city-imposed local assessments as well.
I checked this out at the county auditor’s website. As usual, Councilwoman Murphy did her homework and accurately reported the situation at the L&F meeting.
The municipal complex (Permanent Parcel # 822-08-002) is listed as “exempt” property by the county auditor, and the auditor’s records show that the city pays no property tax on that property.
It’s a different story, however, with regard to the Old Church Building (Permanent Parcel # 821-24-004) and the vacant land next to the park entrance (Permanent Parcel # 822-19-006).
Although it was not discussed at the L&F meeting, it struck me that it is also possible that the Finance Director double-reported revenue in the budget, to the extent that city tax revenues were used to pay any city-levied assessments (i.e., the same tax revenue might have been reported twice in the budget, as both general tax revenue and as revenue from special assessments).
What was Finance Director Tony Ianiro’s response to these revelations? He immediately tried to dismiss the information presented by Councilwoman Cathy Murphy, and when Murphy persisted, he tried to shift the blame to Law Director Tim Paluf---although obviously Paluf wouldn’t have known about the situation, unless Tony Ianiro---who received and paid the auditor’s tax invoices---brought it to his attention.
Our tax dollars at work....?
City taxpayers owe a big “Thanks!” to Councilwoman Murphy for discovering this situation and bringing it to light.
You can check all of this out for yourself. Go to http://auditor.cuyahogacounty.us/
Select “Search Real Estate Property Information”. Use “City of Highland Heights” for the property owner’s last name. The resulting search should show all three city-owned properties.
Recreation Director’s Report To Council
Recreation Director David Ianiro has been very good about attending council meetings this year, in compliance with Highland Heights ordinances, which require him to periodically report to council about how things are going in the recreation department.
Unfortunately, however, Dave Ianiro continues to demonstrate a remarkable lack of ownership of the recreation department budget. While Dave Ianiro provided council with a revenue statement on July 27th, and happily declared that rec revenues were “up from last year” (thanks to fee increases adopted by the Park & Recreation Commission (P&R) earlier this year---the first increases in five years), he failed provide council with any information about the other side of the budget---the expense side. When asked about rec department expenses, Dave Ianiro told council that he didn’t have any recent expense figures ---he was only aware of his expenses up to early June.
Perhaps ignorance is bliss? Only time will tell.
As for the major leak at the city pool, Dave Ianiro stated: “We don’t have the leak solved”.
The Recreation Director got a bit defensive when he learned that residents had been complaining to council members about the fact that bleachers had not been reinstalled near the park softball fields. He told council that P&R decided to remove the bleachers earlier in the summer, that they were attempting to “get all the fields unified” and that (allegedly) having bleachers erected on gravel and/or dirt was not a “safe environment.” Dave Ianiro provided further justification by reporting that people brought their own chairs to sit on after the bleachers were removed and that he didn’t see anyone sitting behind the dugout where one set of bleachers had been located—kind of a strange comment given that the tall, multi-tiered bleachers would have provided a good view of the field from that location, even if a chair on the ground did not.
Labor Contracts and Pay Increases
The city has been negotiating with unions representing city employees since January. Three year labor contracts were recently approved by the unions.
As a matter of practice, city administrators also receive pay raises once the labor contracts are signed. Council approved the labor contract and those pay increases at the July 27th council meeting.
The city administrator who made out best this time around was Building Commissioner Dale Grabfelder. His salary was set at $72,000 when he was hired in February 2010. Under the new pay ordinance, his salary for 2010 has been reset to $ 79,6000. Not a bad pay increase after being on the job for just seven months.
Only one administrator’s salary (that of long-time Police Chief Cook) exceeds $100,000 this year, but Fire Chief Turner and Finance Director Anthony Ianiro aren’t too far behind him. Service Director Thom Evans, who was rehired after retiring, will receive a relatively modest (below $80,000) salary, presumably because of his “double dipper” status.
The Sun Messenger's story about the pay increases:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=5973880655238623733&postID=8317341530669211814One interesting sidelight: As discussed in prior blogs, Mayor Coleman allows Anthony Ianiro to work simultaneously as both this city’s Finance Director and as Finance Director for the City of University Heights. Tony Ianiro is a South Euclid resident. He was quoted in this week’s Sun Messenger. As it turns out, Anthony Ianiro is a member of the group that challenged South Euclid’s decision to take away the tax credit given to residents who work outside that city---- a decision that had obvious and significant financial implications for Tony Ianiro, given the hefty salaries that he collects from both Highland Heights and University Heights.
Read the Sun Messenger story that quotes Tony Ianiro: http://blog.cleveland.com/sunmessenger/2010/07/south_euclid_initiative_petiti.html
Mayor Coleman’s letter to homeowners
Although the door-to-door solicitations had mostly ended, Mayor Coleman nevertheless felt compelled to communicate with residents last week about companies offering to provide free storm inspections and roof replacements. The mayor's letter was hand-delivered to residents’ doors and mailboxes.
Why did the mayor wait so long to address the issue? As he explained to council, the straw that broke his proverbial camel’s back was this: “One solicitor began telling residents that it was city-recommended and that it was working with the mayor personally.” Mayor Coleman told council that the claims were false. The city doesn’t recommend contractors, and no one has replaced his roof.
Mayor Coleman acknowledged that service department workers were used to stuff his letter into plastic bags and to distribute the letters throughout the city. The mayor did not report on how much the workers’ time cost the city, but he claimed that “it would cost several thousand dollars and take 1-2 weeks” if the letter was distributed by the “person who does the (city) newsletter”.
Mayor Coleman did not explain why he chose not to use city hall secretarial staff and bulk mail or, even cheaper, why he didn't use the city’s “code red” reverse 911 calling system---which is already paid for---to provide what he obviously felt was vital information to residents about the solicitations.
The end.
