About Me

My photo
Nazareth, Pa., United States

Wednesday, December 04, 2024

NorCo Council's Changes to Proposed Budget Appear to Be Unlawful

Last week, Northampton County Council proposed seven amendments to next years proposed spending plan. Several are designed to bypass the normal grant process and dole out hotel tax grants to political allies of Republican Council members in Bath Borough and at Columbia Fire Co., where Council member John Goffredo is a member. Those are unseemly and politically motivated, but at least they're legal. But there are also two proposed changes that will violate the Home Rule Charter and run afoul of ordinances and contracts approved by Council. 

The first of these comes from Council member John Brown, who really should know better. He wants to restore $5 million to the county's "rainy day" fund. This was budgeted to cover two months of county expenses in accordance with both a previously enacted ordinance as well as government accounting standards. Brown introduced this amendment because he thinks more money should be set aside for possible unforeseen events. But there's a problem. Fiscal Director Steve Barron told Council that if they adopt this amendment, "the budget is out of balance."

The Home Rule Charter makes very clear that Council must adopt or approved a balanced budget. (Sec. 703 (b)). "There is a transfer out when we need that money to balance the budget," noted Barron. 

Council President Lori Vargo Heffner asserted that, if Council passes such an amendment, it is the Executive's job to somehow make it work. But McClure disagreed and said an unbalanced budget would be a nullity. 

This proposed change only received support from Council members Brown, Vargo-Heffner, Tom Giovanni and John Goffredo. Earlier that evening, Council Clerk said that an amendment needed five votes to move forward, but some members of Council desire to present it anyway. 

The second proposed amendment comes from Council member John Goffredo, who was apparently miffed that McClure attacked Council for ignoring public safety when it rejected a bond that would have included funding for an improved radio system for first responders. He proposed to cut spending "across all divisions" by 2.5% and set that money aside for the radios. 

Goffredo's proposal is unlawful for several reasons. 

First, under the Home Rule Charter, Council has no authority "to delete or decrease any items required by law or for debt service or for estimated cash deficits." (Sec. 704(b)(3)). By imposing an across-the board spending cut of 2.5%, Council would violate the Charter's proscription against decreasing the amount set aside for debt service. 

Second, Council's across-the board spending cut of 2.5% would necessarily means that monies budgeted for wage increases to union workers would be paid at lower amounts that guaranteed in union contracts that Council itself ratified. Corrections officers, Gracedale nurses, 911 operators and Human Services workers would be denied what the county promised to pay them in increased wages. 

Third, Council's across-the board spending cut of 2.5% would result in a reduction of payments to vendors who have valid contracts with the county that Council itself approved. 

Finally, Goffredo's amendment assumes that this money can be taken from county vacancies. But that assumes that there will be vacancies. If the county is able to fully man the Juvenile Justice Center, Gracedale or the jail, it will lack the resources to hire for positions that were budgeted and approved by County Council. Instead of having the money to pay for needed and budgeted manpower, the county would be forced to do without or borrow money to hire. 

This is a foolish amendment. It was obviously proposed to interfere with the efficient operation of the county in a political attempt to spite McClure. It was supported by Republican Council members Tom Giovanni, John Brown and John Goffredo as well as Democrats Jeff Corpora and Lori Vargo Heffner. They all like to accuse McClure of vindictive behavior, but this response would hurt the entire county, especially its employees. 

It is a very disappointing display from elected officials who are more interested in carrying on a war with the Exec than the best interests of the county. 

We'll see what happens Thursday night, when they take up the budget. 

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

If it cuts taxes, I say Go for it!!!

Anonymous said...

You swallow any crap McClure throws out there. Goffredo figured he would make cuts and if there was a special need McClure would shift funds to handle it. Not everything is encumbered and necessary. You know that. The problem is it won't happen. Bullshit Barron, with no formal financial training, will make all sorts of speeches and pronouncements. And would allow the county to have an issue just to spite council. He McClure care about winning not Finacial responsibility. You saw that with P225. The emergency suddenly wasn't an emergency.
So, the budget should just be passed. {Please don't say the Controller can check as that would be Ziirinsky and she is owned by McClure. Another real independent woman, who like Keegan takes orders from a man.

Anonymous said...

So reducing government spending is now illegal? God you are retarded Bernie.

Anonymous said...

This is Lori Vargo Hefner’s chance to be the leader she claims to want to be. Break her pact with the John Brown Gang and kill those unbalanced amendments.

Anonymous said...

No other County Council has ever tried to pass an unbalanced budget. The stain of doing this will stay on everybody who votes for this Frankenstein’s Monster forever. Oh hi, you’re the guy who passed the illegal budget that caused layoffs at 911.

Anonymous said...

What's disappointing is McClure's spending while ignoring public safety for political reasons. He's not a leader and council knows that taxpayers know it.

Anonymous said...

Why does the McClure budget drain $11 million from the Financial Stabilization fund?? He brings it down to the absolute minimum. Is he hiding a big expense or kicking a tax increase until after his reelection? Perhaps both.

Anonymous said...

I like the way you automatically goto hurting the employees. Lamont and previous county executives have done this their whole time in office. The employees are last on his list of worries.
Also a CBA is a legal binding contract the raises are in that. So union employees would get their raises. Maybe not career services. Or future contracts with unions. Hell Lamont loves screwing over union employees already.
But don't worry I don't see them filling any positions at the jail at least. Big class coming in. Think we're in single digits for this new class..HUGE!!!

Anonymous said...

finding $200,000.00 (two hundred thousand dollars) to fund radios in a budget of $500,000,000.00 (five hundred million) should be no problem for our Commissioners. They should get off their lazy asses and start earning their overpaid salaries. They haven't raised taxes in eight years. This means we have been overtaxed for almost a decade. The Cost of Living has gone up about 30% during that time, not Northampton County Taxes. Wake up. You Commissioners sit idly by while employee's wages and benefits are used to balance budgets. You want my vote? Earn it.

Drucker said...

When you want to impede progress or just utterly don't want to accomplish anything, thank an elected body for pandering to unions by approving contracts with lavish raises and posh benefits.

Anonymous said...

You’ve got huge tax increases in Delaware County and Allegheny County, but our Exec. proposes a no tax increase, balanced budget, and County Council wants to blow it up ?

Bernie O'Hare said...

3:57, That's not the way things work. Goffredo proposed an across the board cut to everything. That means everything. He made no exception for what you call a "special need." If McClure does that, then Council can tag him for not following their instructions. If he wants to make cuts, he needs to use a scalpel, not an axe. In a balanced budget, when you reduce the spending, you need to identify specific line items. You are counting on vacancies ti make this happen, but that's not what you did. The amendment is unlawful. Even if you restricted it to employee salaries and benefits, you are interfering with CBAs. So if you don't want to do that, where do you cut? You have not specified. Do you want to screw COs, Gracedale nurses or career service? And don't tell McClure to figure it out. He did his job. Now you do yourss. You do it if you want to screw with people's lives. And by the way, you are assuming that these vacancies will occur, and you know what happens when you assume.

If you want to say McClure was being spiteful for attacking you as endangering public safety when you rejected his bond that included the radio system, or when you made an exception for a burn ban for a frickin' bonfire that the EMS Director point blank told you was a bad idea, this is about the dumbest way possible to do it. And it's also illegal.

As for the Controller, I get you won't listen to her and her warning will fall on deaf ears. You can argue she is McClure owned, although she's been a different person as Controller than she was on Council.

The attacks on Barron are misplaced as well. He studied accounting in college and law school and did accountant work in a nonprofit before he became controller. He is also a certified fraud examiner and has years of experience as a controller.


Bernie O'Hare said...

The spending is not being reduced. It is just being put in another bucket, and in a way that is unlawful.

Bernie O'Hare said...

It will not cut taxes. It might actually make a tax hike necessary next year.

Bernie O'Hare said...

You can argue that McClure ignores public safety or that Council ignores public safety. That is politics. This is a budget. Do your job and enact a lawful budget instead of playing politics.

Bernie O'Hare said...

He made that quite clear. He did so because Council should not be sitting on all that money. He used $11 million to balance the budget and save taxpayers 1.5 mills of taxes. Two months of expenses are all that should be set aside, and that is what he did.

Bernie O'Hare said...

I'm sorry, but Council's amendment is across the board and means that spending set aside for union raises and debt service and payments under other contracts must be reduced by 2.5%. It is unlawful for that reason. The raises may be in the CBA and increases may be in other binding contracts, but Goffredo's amendment cuts the budget that pays for these things. This means that those must be disregarded. That is why his amendment is unlawful.

Bernie O'Hare said...

And this has what to do with proposing as budget that is unlawful?