Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances budget‑reporting measures after dispute with Budget & Fiscal Services
Summary
Council members pushed measures to increase reporting on potential lapses and transfers in the city budget; Budget & Fiscal Services Director Andy Kawano opposed one measure as burdensome and premature, but both items advanced after debate and recorded votes.
The Honolulu City Council advanced measures aimed at increasing transparency about potential lapsed appropriations and intra‑year transfers, despite opposition from the Department of Budget & Fiscal Services (BFS).
What passed or moved forward: Committee Report 338 adopted and Bill 64 (relating to reporting on appropriations and potential lapses) passed second reading; Committee Report 339 and Bill 65 CD1 (related to budget execution reporting) also passed second reading or were adopted during the meeting.
Arguments for the bills: Supporters, most prominently Council Member Tupelo, described Bill 64 as an accountability tool that would require the administration to provide estimates of likely lapses and consolidated reports on transfers so council members can make better decisions during budget preparation. Tupelo said the proposal would help the council “preemptively prepare ourselves for the budget cycle” and allow money to be reallocated to departments that need it, rather than waiting until the end of the fiscal year.
BFS opposition: Andy Kawano, director of Budget & Fiscal Services, testified that the department opposed the measures because producing reliable lapse projections early in the budget cycle is not practicable and would impose substantial extra work on staff. Kawano explained that encumbrances and contract execution often occur late in the year and that BFS already provides quarterly appropriation reports and numerous supplemental schedules; he said forced projections could mislead rather than clarify. Kawano also noted that lapsed funds become fund balance that can improve the city’s credit rating and that moving funds across departments often requires reopening the budget, which creates complexity.
Council debate and outcome: Members who had been budget chairs argued the information would improve decision making and that the council could ask the Office of Council Services (OCS) to pilot consolidated reporting to demonstrate the scope of new reporting. Several council members acknowledged the workload concerns raised by BFS but supported adopting the transparency measures, noting the council’s oversight responsibilities. The motions passed on recorded votes; one council member voted no during a roll call on Bill 64 (Weier), producing an 8–1 tally in favor.
What this means: The council signaled a desire for more consolidated and earlier transparency about likely lapses and mid‑year transfers. BFS’s opposition means the administration will need to reconcile work‑flow and capacity concerns with the council’s requirements; council members suggested possibilities such as OCS mock‑ups or technology investments to reduce staff burden.
Follow up: BFS and council staff will continue conversations about the measures’ operational details and the timeline/capacity for providing the new reports. The council asked that the administration and OCS explore technical options, including modern reporting tools, to produce the information without unduly increasing staff workload.
