February 06, 2004
(Updated) Mayor's Office To Take Charge Of Budget, Not Shuffle Bureau Assignments
Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.
It had been reported more than once that Mayor Vera Katz was intending to reshuffle bureau assignments amongst City Council members early this year. The first indication we had that this would not be the case came during a conversation with a neighborhood activist in attendance at the recent Green Party forum for Mayoral candidates.
This individual stated that he had discussed bureau reassignments with Hannah Kuhn of the Mayor's office after the also-recent Citywide Land Use Group meeting to discuss the Mayor's murals proposal. Kuhn, he said, indicated that such a bureau shuffle was, after all, not being planned despite reports saying otherwise.
Indeed, coverage this week of the Mayor's plans for her final budget process report instead that she will take more direct control over budgeting decisions, rather than changing bureau assignments.
Let's get that part of the story out of the way first, turning to an article in Tuesday's Oregonian:
Portland Mayor Vera Katz is taking firmer control of the city's budget in the final year of her 12-year tenure, vowing to cut administrative costs and wring more money out of city bureaus.
For the first time since she took office in 1993, Katz said Monday that she and central finance staff will work directly with city bureau managers on budget proposals for the next fiscal year.
That decision stops short of a bolder step Katz contemplated -- taking control of city bureaus overseen by the four elected commissioners. But the mayor said her decision bypasses the commissioners on budget making, at least initially, which is an unprecedented step.
This article has Katz arguing that working directly with bureau chiefs heself will help keep them from working at cross purposes, be it intentionally or otherwise -- something also mentioned in today's Portland Tribune:
The biggest challenge with Katz's approach, elected leaders said, will be overcoming an institutional mentality among some in city government who shun bureau crossover. Some city staff members have dubbed it the "silo mentality" because each commissioner oversees his or her own independent group of bureaus with separate chains of command.
Readers here should hear a bell going off in their heads. We've seen mention of this "silo" before, referred to as the Silo Effect in our coverage of a speech given by Mayoral candidate Tom Potter to a small group of local Rotarians. It also crops up in one element of Jim Francesconi's campaign platform plan.
It must be a new management buzzword creeping its way out of the private sector into government these days.
We'll leave the reader to click through to these articles for current details on Katz's budget intentions, which reportedly include plans for a revenue collection bureau and a public works agency. Instead, we'll pull some Council reaction from each.
"[I]f (Katz) comes up with really good ideas and the council buys into them," The Oregonian quotes Commissioner Dan Saltzman, "it's not likely we'll undo them next January."
"[Y]ou really need to demonstrate how you get efficiencies," says Bob Durston (chief of staff for Commissioner Erik Sten) in the Portland Tribune. "Creating a bigger entity doesn't necessarily generate efficiencies in terms of cost savings."
"I'm skeptical that just combining boxes actually saves money, to be honest," says Commissioner Jim Francesconi, also in the Tribune. "I don't see how you -- from a functional standpoint -- keep the quality of services and save money by combining maintenance functions."
Update
And here is what Commissioner Randy Leonard said to The Oregonian although they did not use it: "Vera will not be Mayor next year, but I fully intend to still be a member of the council and I will not fondly remember those Bureau heads that resisted her efforts to find efficiencies in how our city government operates."
Click through to the comments to see more from Leonard regarding the budget process and budget priorities.
Comments (4)
Randy Leonard on 06 Feb 2004
B!X-
I am very supportive of Mayor Katz's approach to the budget this year. Though the Oregonian did not print my remarks, when asked why Bureau Managers should respond to a lame duck Mayor's request to have the bureau heads find efficiencies that could be obtained by merging functions, I responded that
"Vera will not be Mayor next year, but I fully intend to still be a member of the council and I will not fondly remember those Bureau heads that resisted her efforts to find efficiencies in how our city government operates."
We have long since passed the time when our city can afford to be everything to everybody (read that as me being much more skeptical on tax abatements, urban renewal districts and any initiative that does not cause members of our community to pay their full and fair share). We must get the most out of every dollar that a taxpayer gives us. I voted for Measure 30, however, I am painfully cognizant of the fact that a healthy majority of Multnomah County voters did not. Speaking only for myself, I got the message.
I will not be as deferential to the opinion of bureau heads as I was during last years budget process.
Commissioner Randy Leonard
Dave Lister on 07 Feb 2004
Kudos to Commissioner Leonard.
Continuing to plunder the general fund through tax abatements so we can create more yuppie theme parks is exactly what should not be happening during these tight financial times. I'd also like to see some quantitative analysis of urban renewal districts looking back; i.e. was there a gain or a loss on the deferred taxes.
Kudos also to Randy for looking into what might be a big story brewing... the possibility that some substantial amounts of business income taxes have been "settled" for cents on the dollar.
If BIT's can be "settled", I'd like to enter into negotiations ASAP....
hilsy on 07 Feb 2004
Well done Commissioner Leonard. You continue reaffirm my reasons for voting for you. I may not be a fan of Vera, but I agree that this tactic in the budget process is good. Please keep up the good work.
Portland Citizen on 08 Feb 2004
There's excellent Measure 30 fallout discussion in this blog and the ones referenced--but I think all discussion is incomplete if it does not include Oregon's rural/urban divide.
It was this divide that dragged Portland into fiscal problems. 1) Portland agreed with state voters for statewide, equal funding of schools; 2) rural voters repeatedly vetoed the tax rates necessary to continue this funding.
Basically, the rural counties want Portland to pay higher taxes for their services, whether or not that tax rate is sufficient for Portland's local needs.
Even with Portland currently sending $400 million to fund rural schools, rural voices are now cursing Portland. Even if all metro Portland voted for Measure 30 (as I did), it still would have failed, due to lack of rural support.
To me, the rural/urban divide is the root cause of the problems; to point at items such as the streetcar is nitpicking that illuminates little.
Thanks again for this discussion.