Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Reservation Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee forwards ordinance to reserve 50% of office budgets for incoming elected officials
Summary
The Detroit Budget, Finance and Audit Committee held a public hearing and voted to forward an ordinance that would split certain council office budgets so half is reserved for incoming office holders in election years; supporters say it creates predictability, critics urged returning unspent funds to the general fund.
The Budget, Finance and Audit standing committee on Wednesday held a public hearing and voted to forward an ordinance amending Chapter 17 of the Detroit City Code to reserve 50% of certain elected-office budget allocations for incoming office holders in years with a regular city general election.
The ordinance would split an elected-office holder’s adopted general-fund allocation for the fiscal year into two six-month allocations. As described to the committee, each office would receive 50% of the unencumbered allocation for the first six months (July 1 through December 31) and the remaining 50% would be reserved for the incoming office holder determined by that year’s regular city general election.
Proponents, including Acting Deputy Chief Financial Officer and Budget Director Donnie Johnson, said the ordinance largely codifies a resolution the body approved months earlier and would create a predictable, cyclical process for transitions. "This ordinance essentially codifies into the city code… the same provisions as the ordinance," Johnson said, adding it should be "very straightforward" to administer and "will make my life a little bit easier" by making transitions predictable.
Members pressed staff on whether unspent or encumbered funds would carry over. Johnson replied that any remaining funds would roll to the next council member unless the outgoing member designates a use for them before leaving office, noting that end-of-term obligations such as vacation payouts could consume surpluses.
Several public commenters urged caution. Jadonti Smith said he had little time to study the proposal and asked the council to "study this before you vote on anything," stressing the importance of budget resources for underserved districts. Caller Carolyn Hughes argued unspent funds should return to the general fund and that reallocating surplus funds requires public process: "Those funds . . . would go back to the general fund. This is not your Play Doh money," she said.
Council staff sought to address public concerns. Miss Barclay explained that the change does not divert money into a new fund but changes the timing of releases: "At the beginning of the fiscal year, 50% of the budget is released. At January, the other 50% of the budget is released. The money is not going into any other funds. It is staying within that office." Grama Anderson of the Law Department reiterated the ordinance’s definitions and said it was intended to resolve issues identified by Council Member Johnson.
With a motion from Member Young, the committee moved to send the item forward with a recommendation to approve; the chair said, "hearing no objections," and recorded that "that action shall be taken." The ordinance will go to the full council for further consideration.
The committee’s record shows debate about whether leftover funds should be considered office-specific allocations or revert to the general fund; staff described operational mechanics but several callers and residents asked for more time and clearer public notice before final adoption.
