Wednesday, March 19, 2014

(VIDEO) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - Q & A COMMISSIONER COMMENTS



VIDEO
BUDGET DIRECTOR NICHOLS
&
COMMISSIONER TOM BERNABEI
Q&A ON BUDGET PRESENTATION

=============================
COMMISSIONER RICHARD REGULA
ON
"PLANNING ASPECT OF BUDGET"
==============================
COMMISSIONER JANET CREIGHTON
ON
THE NEED TO BE FRUGAL IN BUDGETING
 
As "a public service" the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

Today, The Report presents "Volume Question & Answer (including Commissioner Regula and Creighton comments)" of Stark County Commissioners' Budget Director Chris Nichols' 2014 Stark County "proposed" budget.

Readers of this blog to get a full appreciation of Nichols' presentation should make sure that they have read prior blogs in order as listed below:
  1. Volume 1
  2. Volume 2 
  3. Volume 3 
  4. Volume 4
  5. Volume 5 
  6. Volume 6
    In Volume 1, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei appears in the video and outlines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
    1. The county must live within its means,
    2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
    3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
    4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable budgets"
    After about a 45 minute budget presentation (see Volumes 1 through 6), Budget Director Chris Nichols and Commissioner Tom Bernabei (president of the Stark County Board of County Commissioners) take questions from county employees in various aspects of the budget.

    Also, in the video which appears at the end of this video, Commissioners Regula and Creighton weigh-in on various aspects of the budgeting process.

    Regula has high words of praise for the five years out planning of Director Nichols.  Regula was commissioner from 2003 through 2006 and therefore has something to compare Nichols' presentation to.

    As for Commissioner Creighton, she was at her "salty best" in reminding Stark County employees including elected Stark County officials that the commissioners will not be letting up on their oversight of county finances.

    And finally a note (received by the SCPR late yesterday) from the "lead-man" of the entire budgeting process; namely, Chris Nichols, to wit:

    Martin:
    ... .


    As of now, it does not appear there will be any material changes, just a few small tweaks.

    I think your blogs have been a good and accurate representation of the proposed budget.  


    The only comment/note on an interpretation I would have is regarding the revenue estimates of Casino Revenue.  

    I agree that Casino Revenues are well behind what the state had initially forecast.  In my budget model, I am not utilizing any of the state's forecast numbers.  I am using last year's Actual Casino revenues received by Stark County as the baseline, so the assumption is that the actual revenue received by Stark County remains somewhat consistent to 2013.

    ... .

    Chris


    The Report joins Commissioner Regula is handing out kudos to Nichols.

    As readers of the SCPR know, it is rarity for The Report to hand out accolades to public employees.  To The Report, they are doing what they are paid to do.  And, as compared to the private sector (when one includes benefits), they are paid rather handsomely.

    Only those like Nichols, whom The Report sees so far as going beyond the call of expected duty, merit special recognition.

    That's why the SCPR wants to gag when the likes of former Canton Municipal Court chief deputy Randy Gonzalez (also Jackson Township fiscal officer and Stark County Democratic Party chairman) wants to attribute to himself (and, apparently, other family members in government employment) as rendering a "public service" as a matter of family tradition.

    While he has been involved in some notable Stark County enhancing achievements:
    • The rehab of Stark County's 9-1-1 call receiving and dispatch emergency services,
    • The cobbling together of the Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS), and
    • The formulation of an economic development pact among Jackson, Plain and Canton,
    in doing so, there is nothing extraordinary about his contribution. It has been "all in a day's work" for which he has been richly rewarded.

    Accordingly, Gonzalez has to try the "public service" self-promotion routine on someone other than the SCPR. 

    The SCPR has demonstrated journalistic "due diligence," as a matter of uncompensated "public service" to providing Stark Countians with insight into county budgeting process so that everyday citizens are in a position to judge how well or how poorly the commissioners and other elected and appointed public officials are doing with taxpayer provided resources.

    Most readers of the SCPR recognize the diligence and thoroughness of The Report.

    But because Gonzalez and his friends (i.e. the Maier Loyalty Club) are not used to being scrutinized by anybody, he and his ilk whine and complain when the SCPR spotlight gets turned on them.  Gonzalez, in particular, seems to The Report to have an expectation that media types act as his public relations agent.  And, by way of example, Ponder of WHBC, the SCPR thinks, accommodates.

    The SCPR counts it as a good thing to be criticized by Gonzalez et al.  It is one of those situations that if Gonzalez and company were to say anything positive about the work of The Report; such would be a cause for alarm.

    The Report has been covering the commissioners since 2008 and has seen numerous county budgeting processes.

    The Report's take on the current Board of Stark County Commissioners is that the board is far and away leaps and bounds over any previous boards which have served since 2008 and, perhaps, going back a ways beyond 2008.

    Much better than the likes of Todd Bosley, Tom Harmon, Steve Meeks and Gayle Jackson of more recent times.

    Commissioner Creighton to the SCPR is the leading "jawboning" commissioner in relation to tamping down on several (not all) Stark County department heads and their tendency to disdain frugality with taxpayer provided funds.

    During the department budget hearings held in the commissioners' meeting room in January and February of the year, Creighton is seen to be the most "in-your-face" of the three commissioners for those department heads who appeared to be "gaming" the commissioners on their budget numbers.

    Back in Volume 1, Director Nichols is to be seen talking about there being $64 million requested on what turns out to be about a $60 million appropriated in the 2014 budget.

    The excess $64 million request (remember, by some $4 million to $5 million) highlight the fact that Nichols and the commissioners have their work cut out for them as managers of county finances in staying on track for maintaining budgets 2015 through 2019 that will keep expenses within revenues without totally depleting the carry over.

    With the "due diligence" they have demonstrated, the current $10 million carryover is projected to dip to $6.1 million.

    The question going forward is, and, of course, the SCPR will be watching:  Can the commissioners and Nichols keep the county solvent through 2019?

    Only the passage of time will tell the story, but the SCPR is betting on this board of commissioners and Director Nichols getting the job done.

    Here is the last Thursday's Q&A video (led by Director Nichols and Commissioner Bernabei) with comments by Commissioners Regula and Creighton.

    In order, the first video is on the Regula and Creighton comments followed second by the Q&A session.


    Tuesday, March 18, 2014

    (VIDEO) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - VOLUME NO. 6



    VIDEO

    STARK CO. BUDGET DIRECTOR
    CHRIS NICHOLS

    SEGMENT 6

    CAPITAL BUDGET
    "NEW" DEPT 43
    DEPT 35
    NEW FOR 2014
    COMING IN 2015
    FINAL 2014 BUDGET PLAN PROCESS

    As "a public service" the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

    Today, The Report presents Volume  of Stark County Commissioners' Budget Director Chris Nichols' 2014 Stark County "proposed" budget.

    Readers of this blog to get a full appreciation of Nichols' presentation should make sure that they have read prior blogs in order as listed below:
    1. Volume 1
    2. Volume 2 
    3. Volume 3 
    4. Volume 4
    5. Volume 5
    In Volume 1, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei appears in the video and outlines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
    1. The county must live within its means,
    2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
    3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
    4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable budgets"
    In today's presentation, Budget Director Nichols finalizes this nearly 45 minute presentation (overall; this video being about 7 minutes) talking about:
    • capital items in the 2014 budget,
    • the fact these items beginning in 2014 in the budget being placed in a new Department 43,
    • Department 35 budget items,
    • a summation of "new" items in 2014, and 
    • what is coming as being "new" in 2015

      (VIDEO) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - VOLUME NO. 5




      VIDEO

      STARK CO. BUDGET DIRECTOR
      CHRIS NICHOLS

      SEGMENT 5

      THE 2014 PROPOSED BUDGET

      BUDGET DIRECTOR CHRIS NICHOLS
      EXPLAINS
      "HOW WE GOT THERE"

      As "a public service" the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

      Today, The Report presents Volume 5 of Stark County Commissioners' Budget Director Chris Nichols' 2014 Stark County "proposed" budget.

      Readers of this blog to get a full appreciation of Nichols' presentation should make sure that they have read prior blogs in order as listed below:
      1. Volume 1
      2. Volume 2 
      3. Volume 3 
      4. Volume 4
      In Volume 1, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei appears in the video and oulines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
      1. The county must live within its means,
      2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
      3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
      4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable" budgets.
      In this series of blogs we have traveled the twists, turns and travails of the budgetary road with our driver and Stark County budget director Chris Nichols.


      The SCPR has annotated Nichols' graphic to show which departments did good and which did not do so good in toeing the line of being a team player in helping the county realize a trajectory which will keep the county solvent through 2019 when the current 0.5% eight year long sales tax expires.

      While 2019 seems like a long way off, in terms of setting the table to be in a position for the Stark County voting public to say in the primary or general election of 2019 (at sales tax levy renewal time) "well done, thou good and faithful servant," 2014 is a critical year in establishing a base which with a few tweaks in years 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 puts the county in a position to achieve voter approval in 2019.

      One of the most telling charts that Nichols prepared was one in which he did a history of appropriations from 2010 (before the financial crisis hit full force) and 2014, which, of course, is the first year of full recovery from the nose dive of 2011 and 2012.


      Travel along via video with Budget Director Nichols as he takes us down "the road less traveled" of fiscal austerity that many of we taxpayers think that government at all levels has pretty much avoided over much of the history of our nation.



      (VIDEO) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - VOLUME NO. 4



      VIDEO

      STARK CO. BUDGET DIRECTOR
      CHRIS NICHOLS

      SEGMENT 4

      PROJECTED 40%
      CASH FLOW DECLINE

      As "a public service" the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

      Today, The Report presents Volume 4 of Stark County Commissioners' Budget Director Chris Nichols' 2014 Stark County "proposed" budget.

      Readers of this blog to get a full appreciation of Nichols' presentation should make sure that they have read prior blogs in order as listed below:
      1. Volume 1
      2. Volume 2 
      3. Volume 3
      In Volume 1, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei appears in the video and outlines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
      1. The county must live within its means,
      2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
      3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
      4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable budgets
      In video segment 4 Nichols focuses on cash flow.

      Why cash flow?

      In 2014 Stark County has about $10.5 million in carry-over from 2013.

      By the time the county gets to 2018, the carry over is down to about $6 million.

      The dissipation means that because there are increases in annual budgetary expenditures not offset by proportional increases in revenues, the county has to dip into that original $10.5 million to make up the difference which means that the county is running more of a risk that in the case of a calamity of some sort the county is less prepared to meet an emergency need.

      • SCPR Note:  The Report has taken the liberty to:
        • add in to Nichols' chart red (for increased expenditures) dotted horizontal lines with red vertical lines to show graphically the approximate double rate of increased expenditures over increased revenues for the time span 2014 through 2018 to show the precarious state that Stark County government finances are
      If the decline becomes even greater because of even a slight error in Nichols' assumption, there is the possibility (the SCPR's view; not one expressed by Nichols) that the county could get itself into a "rob Peter to pay Paul" situation.  In other words, living "hand to mouth" throughout a given budgetary year as the sales tax cycle (ending in 2019) closes out.

      Follow along with Chris Nichols' excellent presentation in his own words:


      Monday, March 17, 2014

      (VIDEO) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - VOLUME NO. 3



      VIDEO

      STARK CO. BUDGET DIRECTOR
      CHRIS NICHOLS

      SEGMENT 3

      REVENUES - PART 2
      &
      "BIG" INCREASE
      FROM
      2013 TO 2014

      As "a public service" the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

      Today, The Report presents Volume 3 of Stark County Commissioners' Budget Director Chris Nichols' 2014 Stark County "proposed" budget.

      Readers of this blog to get a full appreciation of Nichols' presentation should make sure that they have read prior blogs in order as listed below:
      1. Volume 1
      2. Volume 2
      In Volume 1, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei appears in the video and outlines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
      1. The county must live within its means,
      2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
      3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
      4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable budgets
      In segment 3 Nichols reveals what a "conservative" financial guy he is.

      Take a look at this slide from his presentation:


      He relied on the Stark County Budget Commission projects of $55.6 million as the estimate of revenues available for the 2014 which he understood to be on the conservative side.

      And was he correct in his assessment?

      Indeed!

      The real number is going to be more like $59.3 million.

      The commissioners and county department heads have to like Nichols brand of being conservative, no?

      As impressive as he was on the revenue projects, the SCPR thinks he might be missing the mark on his assumptions, to wit:


      Most likely on the last point:  local government funding and casino revenues.

      When proponents were selling the casino idea to the Ohio General Assembly, it was all "pie in the sky," remember?

      How often are we seeing these days media accounts of disappointing casino revenues flowing through to local governments?

      The Report thinks Kasich is going to dish out another hit on local government funding if he is reelected.


        Sunday, March 16, 2014

        (VIDEO) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - VOLUME NO. 2




        VIDEO

        STARK CO. BUDGET DIRECTOR
        CHRIS NICHOLS

        SEGMENT 2

        REVENUES - PART 1

        As "a public service" the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

        Today, The Report presents Volume 2 of Stark County Commissioners' Budget Director Chris Nichols' 2014 Stark County "proposed" budget.

        Readers of this blog to get a full appreciation of Nichols' presentation should make sure that they have read prior blogs in order as listed below:
        1. Volume 1
        In Volume 1, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei appears in the video and outlines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
        1. The county must live within its means,
        2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
        3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
        4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable budgets,
        In this segment 2, Nichols talks about:
        • the projected dip in revenues for budget year 2014 and the specific reasons for the slide,
        • the breakdown of where Stark County revenues come from and the percentage of each category, and
        • the fact that the total county revenues come from 27 different sources,
        Much ado has been made by various Stark County officials (e.g. Canton mayor William J. Healy, North Canton officials et cetera) and there is no doubt that villages, townships and cities have been hurt because of the beginning in 2011 the halving of State of Ohio funds (e.g. local government funds, the estate tax and a public utilities tax) being distributed to Stark's political subdivisions.

        A few years ago State of Ohio local government funding of county government was more than double the current percentage (4.3%) of total county revenues.

        Some observers think that, if Republican John Kasich is reelected, there will be another round of local government funds slashing.  In recent days, the governor has come out with a proposal to make an 8.5% across-all-tax brackets in cuts.  The question is:  Will some of the make-up of lost revenues be at the expense of local governments?

        Here is a 6:53 video of Nichols's comments on the state of Stark County revenues.

          Saturday, March 15, 2014

          (VIDEOS) SCPR SERIES ON 2014 STARK CO. BUDGET - VOLUME NO. 1



          VIDEO

          STARK CO. BUDGET DIRECTOR
          CHRIS NICHOLS

           "INTRO"

          (COMMISSIONER BERNABEI "CAMEO")

          ON

          2014
          STARK COUNTY BUDGET

          As "a public service" (attn:  Stark Dems' chairman Randy Gonzalez) the SCPR brings to everyday Stark Countians a multi-part series (eight blogs in all) on the "proposed" (see disclaimer in graphic above) 2014 Stark County budget.

          Today, The Report presents Volume One.

          First, a word about Stark County Budget Director Chris Nichols.

          On June 19, 2013, in what was somewhat of a surprise to the SCPR, the Stark County commissioners announced at their regular weekly meeting (held on Wednesdays at 1:30 PM on the second floor of the Stark County Office Building nearly every week of the year) that they were hiring one Chris Nichols as the commissioners' Director of Management and Budget.
          • SCPR Note:  Readers, please go to this LINK in order to get background on the hiring of Nichols.
            • As SCPR readers know, The Report's forte is having a healthy skepticism of government as applied to the villages, cities, townships and boards of education that make up the political subdivisions of our Stark County.  Of course, the county government itself gets a continuing and persistent SCPR "once over."
            • The LINK provides readers with an example of the critique that the SCPR applies to each and every action done by the Stark County commissioners including the hiring of Chris.
              • In a recent SCPR sit down with Nichols, one of the things he brought up, was the graphic that The Report used in analyzing his hiring by the commissioners.  And he talked about how a relative is prone to kid him about the graphic
              • County employees like Nichols are favorites of the SCPR because Nichols exemplifies a fully mature public official who does not take offense at being scrutinized and, in fact, welcomes inquiry, and does not take himself so seriously that he cannot take being poked fun of.
              • Unfortunately, the SCPR believes that Nichols is the exception rather than the rule among Stark County officialdom, especially those officials who are elected.
                • It is noteworthy that he is an "appointed" official, although, as pointed out in the LINK, he is an elected Canton Township trustee.
              • More typical of what the SCPR gets (again, the emphasis on the "elected" ones), given The Report's incisive, no-nonsense questioning is that exemplified by Stark County Stark County Democratic Party "appointed" sheriff George T. Maier.
                • It is apparent to The Report that Maier thinks he is not accountable to the Stark County public except for the softballs tossed his way by Stark's mainstream media.
          Now, off the soapbox.

          On to The Report's Volume One and examining "in detail" the 2014 Stark County Budget.


          The Stark County sales tax ([0.5%]Justice System Sales Tax "JSST") was passed in 2011 in a superlative campaign put on at the initiative of and on the energy of, elected in November, 2010, commissioners Thomas Bernabei (Democrat) and Janet Creighton (Republican).

          The above graphic (numbers supplied by Nichols) is the base from which the SCPR is formulated upon because it is the "first full year" that the JSST was collected.

          Readers are reminded that the county was barely done with what one Stark County civic activist as termed as being "Zeiglergate" when Stark Countians saw fit to pass the 0.5% JSST.
          • SCPR Note:  (LINK for background; Zeigler resigned/retired on October 19, 2011 a matter of about 2-1/2 weeks before the November, 2011 election)
          While the SCPR supported the 0.5% sales tax increase, The Report wrote at the time that the commissioners should have put on a full 1%.

          Why was The Report for a full 1%?

          First, because the 0.5% over an eight-year life cycle is problematical in terms of being enough for base county government operations to be sustainable at the end of the cycle in 2019, and

          Second, because the 0.5% does not allow enough financial resources to provide for such critical local government funding:
          • for long term capital improvement projects (e.g. solving Stark County chronic flooding problems because of neglected maintenance and capital improvement of the county's storm water carry off "ditch system,"), and
          • for the fostering of job creating economic development projects.
          The commissioners ignored the SCPR and a number of countywide elected officials (e.g. Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero) in the call for a full 1% sales tax increase.

          Though the SCPR recognizes that the commissioners had concerns about passing any levy in the wake of Zeiglergate, hindsight does show that a full 1% was likely doable.

          The commissioners made their choice and must now deal with the financially constrained circumstances under which they govern.

          The Report will not abide excuses from the commissioners of having inadequate funding when the summer storms come and flood out all too many "everyday" Stark Countians and the stagnation at 7.3% unemployment that Stark County continues to be plagued with.

          SCPR holds the commissioners accountable to become creative and find ways and means, in the context of the 0.5% JSST for eight years, to deal with the ditching problems and getting something substantial going on the economical development front.

          As so should day-in, day-out Stark Countians.

          As seen in the graphic above, Stark County starts out 2014 with $10.5 million carry-over from 2013 into the new fiscal year (January 1 through December 31) 2014.

          The SCPR videotaped the entire presentation that Budget Director Nichols gave last Wednesday (March 13, 2014).


          And somewhere along the line doing this multi-volume series, The Report will make available the entire (approximately 45 minute) presentation.

          However, the SCPR recognizes that it is best, given the attention span that most of us human being have, to break up the videos in to digestible segments.

          In today's five minute video (actually 4:32), Chris Nichols gives a general background and survey for the 2014 budget.

          Also, at the very beginning of the video, Commissioner Thomas Bernabei outlines the four (4) guidelines that he and fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Richard Regula laid out to Nichols in formulating the 2014 budget, to wit:
          1. The county must live within its means,
          2. New revenue for the year must support the operation budget of the county through 2019,
          3. Carry-over funds cannot be used to fund the day-to-day operations of government,
          4. He must build a 2014 budget that forms a viable base on which budgets through 2019 can be realistically projected as being "sustainable budgets,