“We will adopt the General Fund Budget in its entirety or not at all.” – Mayor Tim Riley
That was my position on June 16 when offering a “statement on General Fund negotiation” which had been nonexistent up to that time. It is still my position, one week before we hope to adopt the same 2025-2026 budget that was first introduced on May 5 and rejected by a 3-2 vote of the Council on May 27 without a word of explanation from the majority. With little to no subsequent feedback, the very same General Fund Budget was reintroduced on June 9 and scheduled for Public Hearing and final vote on July 14.
I urge the legislative branch to adopt it so that we might ensure seamless operations in the city and continue to deliver the services that our citizens deserve.
I am pleased to report that my administration did meet with two of those three council holdouts, a two-hour meeting on June 18. Faulk & Winkler’s Jacob Waguespack was present and documented the changes desired by Councilmen Kirk Boudreaux and Tyler Turner. The third member of the majority scheduled a meeting for the morning of June 20 but failed to keep the appointment.
Amendments proposed by Councilmen Boudreaux and Turner on June 18
NOTE: The council members had been provided the budget 44 days prior to the June 18 meeting.
While my administration does not favor the proposed changes, they are not unreasonable and at least the proposing council members offered reasons for the amendments. To summarize the changes sought:
- An additional $150,000 Consulting Fee to pay for Planning & Development services currently provided by All South engineers (our director left the city earlier this year)
- A $70,000 reduction in Administration salaries (with corresponding reductions in Overtime, Retirement, Medicare, Workers Comp Insurance and Health Insurance costs)
- Elimination of a $300,000 Consulting Fee proposal (to be replaced by a $250,000 appropriation for All South to continue providing engineering and project management; and $75,000 to fund Faulk & Winkler since our Finance Director also resigned in March)
- Elimination of $250,000 to enact a new Master Plan
- Elimination of $130,000 Emergency & Contingency line item (which has been included in every budget going back more than a decade)
- Elimination of miscellaneous appropriations totaling $31,500
Additional requests were made during that meeting, and I directed Mr. Waguespack to provide the requesting councilmen with any information sought without limitation. Receiving almost daily updates from Faulk & Winker, it is my understanding that all requests have been answered.
Public statements by those two councilmen to contrary notwithstanding, most notably a June 26 publication in a local media outlet, neither have been denied any information by my administration.
Faulk & Winkler has informed every council member that the firm will be available to meet through July 8, six days prior to the Public Hearing and final vote on the proposed budget. The intent of those meetings, as my administration has been made to understand, is consolidation of all desired budget amendments. When/if those changes are formalized and communicated my administration will consider them and respond without delay, whether or not I intend to exercise the mayoral veto should the council adopt an amended budget deemed unacceptable.
As I have stated:
“We will adopt the General Fund Budget in its entirety or not at all.”
Attempts to exclude funding for every department other than Police and Fire will be vetoed.
Adoption of an amended budget which eliminates funding for every position that happens to be vacant at present will be met by the veto. We are shorthanded after a tumultuous transition period, and I will not be placed in a position where the administration has to ask the council for a budget increase whenever we need to hire a new employee.
My team is prepared to move forward responsibly, preparing for any eventuality even if that means proceeding with half of last year’s budget at our disposal. We have considered every line item in the General Fund first proposed on May 5, especially those which fund salaries of certain employees. Drastic measures, including layoffs, had to be considered.
NOTE: Louisiana Revised Statute 39:1312 reads, “If, at the end of any fiscal year, the appropriations necessary for the support of the political subdivision for the ensuing fiscal year have not been made, then fifty percent of the amounts appropriated in the appropriation ordinance or resolution for the last completed fiscal year shall be deemed reappropriated for the several objects and purposes specified in such appropriation ordinance or resolution.” Gonzales’ fiscal year ended on May 31.
There will be no layoffs, no matter how long it takes to adopt the General Fund Budget. Our hardworking employees deserve better than being used as political pawns. My administration will not allow it.
As we have been since May 5 when my proposed budget was first introduced, we are available to meet with any council member. I believe there is a compromise to be had, but not one which diminishes my administration’s ability to operate the city.
Respectfully,
Mayor Timothy “Tim” Riley
EDITOR’s NOTE: As always, we invite any council member (or anyone else) to submit his/her thoughts that will be disseminated without edit or adulteration.
Loading ...