Deficit or Not, Numbers Matter More Than Words

"A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."
-- Senator Everett Dirksen

Yesterday, I asked what I considered to be a very simple question: Is Richardson's proposed 2011-2012 budget in balance? The city says yes. I looked at the numbers and concluded no.

Wouldn't you think that's a simple question that we ought to be able to agree on? Look at revenues. Look at expenditures. Subtract. If the number is positive, you have a surplus. If the number is negative, you have a deficit. I have a pretty hefty background in mathematics. I've studied differential calculus and matrix algebra and non-Euclidean geometry. But I admit my accounting training is limited (and by limited, I mean non-existent). So, I won't claim I'm necessarily right on an accounting question. But this one seems simple. And no one's stepped forward to educate me on why I'm wrong. I have several theories why that might be.

One, maybe because I'm actually right, but the city has a mental block preventing them from admitting that their budget has a (slight) deficit. Their belief that it's just prudent fiscal management to draw down those excess funds (it might well be) prevents them from conceiving how that can be compatible with a budget deficit. They are ingrained to believe that deficits are always bad, so how can they possibly be recommending a budget that is in deficit? The only way to resolve their cognitive dissonance is to deny the obvious: that their budget has a (slight) deficit.

Or two, maybe because there's a state legal requirement that city budgets be balanced, meaning there's a legal definition of what "balanced" means that doesn't exactly match the dictionary definition. As long as the city meets the legal definition, their budget is in (legal) balance, even if the numbers show a teensy-tiny (dictionary) deficit.

Or three, maybe because I'm just too dense to understand accounting and the city has given up trying to explain it to me. Let's go with this last possibility as our working hypothesis.

After the jump, moving on to the next question.

Fashion in Finance: Red is the New Black

Monday night, the Richardson City Council spent four hours reviewing the 2011-2012 Proposed Budget. Of that four hours, almost an hour was spent on essentially one topic -- raises for city employees. The discussion was led by city employees. Perhaps a university sociologist might want to research the connection between those facts. If the discussion were instead led by, say, HOA presidents, might the time spent on different areas of the budget have been different? Not that I begrudge city employees a raise. I'm just reporting the idle thoughts I had while I watched all the evidence collected and presented by city employees justifying raises for city employees.

After the jump, a more effective use of your time -- the budget in a nutshell and the key points that affect your pocketbook.

The DMN Has Gone to the Dogs

If you're a reader of online news in Dallas, you're certainly aware that The Dallas Morning News erected a paywall in March, meaning that much of the newspaper's content is available only to paid subscribers. Here's what Publisher Jim Moroney said subscribers could expect:

"As your 'window on the world,' The Dallas Morning News takes seriously its mission to provide you not only with practical day-to-day news and analysis to prepare you for the day ahead, but also in-depth coverage of the larger stories that shape your world. We have invested heavily in our newsroom to ensure you get not only the most extensive original coverage of what is happening locally, but also commentary and insight into those regional, state, national and international events that impact your life right here in North Texas.
...
The journalism you’ve come to value in your print edition is now available in a new, easier-to-use format at dallasnews.com, as well as through new applications for your tablet and smartphone. While these digital versions will be updated several times a day, we’ll also be bringing you breaking stories -- complete with stunning photos, video and our first-rate reporting -- as they happen."

Anyway, that was the promise. After the jump, an example of "the journalism you've come to value" that he's hiding behind the paywall.

Richardson Budget: So Close to Black

The City of Richardson's 2011-2012 Proposed Budget is available for review on the city's website.

The most important item on my own wish list does not appear to have been granted. I said, make sure the budget is "balanced." By that, I meant the line labeled "Net Budgeted Revenues" ($186,906,381) should be greater than the line labeled "Net Budgeted Expenditures" ($188,561,154). You do the math.

After the jump, a rant and a question.

Open Mike Night: Goals

The Visitors Section of the Richardson City Council meeting sometimes is the best part of the show. Sometimes that is because of the amusement it offers, but sometimes because of the thoughtful and thought-provoking ideas offered. Monday night's lineup included some of the latter.

Andrew Laska offered his suggestions for the Statement of Goals for the 2011-2013 council term. You know the routine for such documents -- Vision, Mission, Priorities, Goals and Action Items liberally sprinkled throughout with Snooze. Even the best of these efforts are often painful to read. Worse, Richardson's past efforts weren't among the best of these efforts.

After the jump, my own rant about Richardson's past efforts and Andrew Laska's recommendations.