MONROE - The term "fiscal responsibility" came to the attention of Monroe aldermen Tuesday, as two council members explained their positions on separate city issues.
After the business portion of the Monroe City Council meeting, Alderman Charles Schuringa made a statement against a proposed transportation utility.
"I'm thoroughly opposed to this (utility). It falls under a tax deal," he told fellow council members.
Schuringa noted the discontent of residents after a stormwater utility was developed.
"People in my area are not going to stand for another tax," he said.
Schuringa suggested the city look at charging residents for a vehicle registration sticker. That option was better than a utility, he said.
A transportation utility is intended to raise the necessary funds for replacing and installing sidewalks, streets and curbs and gutters, instead of assessing property adjoining the construction. The utility would charge a fee calculated on the amount of traffic in and out of any property.
The idea of a transportation utility for Monroe was sent to the Finance and Taxation Committee on a council vote of 8-1 on May 18. Alderman Thurston Hanson voted against the motion; Neal Hunter was absent.
The committee kicked the idea back to council the following night, asking for another presentation, and more opportunity to question the details of such a plan. No date has been announced for the second meeting.
Mayor Ron Marsh explained where the committee could accumulate $40,000 from the budget for the utility implementation and outreach to educate the public. Marsh said the money would not all be spent at one time, and would be absorbed by the utility when it was in place.
But Schuringa said $40,000 could be used to help pay for a city administrator, and also would not have to be paid out all at one time.
"We've got an economic crunch right now, and we decided to leave the administrator by the wayside," Schuringa said.
The city department heads told council members on May 19 they were willing to forgo an administrator because of the budget constraints, and continue working under the guidance of council members. The issue of hiring an administrator then became a "moot point," Alderman Mark Coplien said.
Earlier in Tuesday's meeting, the council voted 6-4 on a resolution to take a second look at expenses over $25,000 from capital accounts of all departments. Coplien supported the resolution, explaining during the meeting that a resolution approving all capital expenditures over $25,000 would be "extra control in case something happens" after the budget is set in the fall.
"It's not to tie the hands of department heads, but for fiscal responsibility, and to show all residents the fiscal responsibility," he added.
Alderperson Charles Koch called the measure unnecessary.
"Expenses are approved by Finance and Taxation at budget time," he said. "I think this is just another step in the bureaucracy."
Two departments already have budget issues, Coplien responded.
"That doesn't mean things don't change in time," he added.
After the business portion of the Monroe City Council meeting, Alderman Charles Schuringa made a statement against a proposed transportation utility.
"I'm thoroughly opposed to this (utility). It falls under a tax deal," he told fellow council members.
Schuringa noted the discontent of residents after a stormwater utility was developed.
"People in my area are not going to stand for another tax," he said.
Schuringa suggested the city look at charging residents for a vehicle registration sticker. That option was better than a utility, he said.
A transportation utility is intended to raise the necessary funds for replacing and installing sidewalks, streets and curbs and gutters, instead of assessing property adjoining the construction. The utility would charge a fee calculated on the amount of traffic in and out of any property.
The idea of a transportation utility for Monroe was sent to the Finance and Taxation Committee on a council vote of 8-1 on May 18. Alderman Thurston Hanson voted against the motion; Neal Hunter was absent.
The committee kicked the idea back to council the following night, asking for another presentation, and more opportunity to question the details of such a plan. No date has been announced for the second meeting.
Mayor Ron Marsh explained where the committee could accumulate $40,000 from the budget for the utility implementation and outreach to educate the public. Marsh said the money would not all be spent at one time, and would be absorbed by the utility when it was in place.
But Schuringa said $40,000 could be used to help pay for a city administrator, and also would not have to be paid out all at one time.
"We've got an economic crunch right now, and we decided to leave the administrator by the wayside," Schuringa said.
The city department heads told council members on May 19 they were willing to forgo an administrator because of the budget constraints, and continue working under the guidance of council members. The issue of hiring an administrator then became a "moot point," Alderman Mark Coplien said.
Earlier in Tuesday's meeting, the council voted 6-4 on a resolution to take a second look at expenses over $25,000 from capital accounts of all departments. Coplien supported the resolution, explaining during the meeting that a resolution approving all capital expenditures over $25,000 would be "extra control in case something happens" after the budget is set in the fall.
"It's not to tie the hands of department heads, but for fiscal responsibility, and to show all residents the fiscal responsibility," he added.
Alderperson Charles Koch called the measure unnecessary.
"Expenses are approved by Finance and Taxation at budget time," he said. "I think this is just another step in the bureaucracy."
Two departments already have budget issues, Coplien responded.
"That doesn't mean things don't change in time," he added.