"Just the Facts Please": A Close Look at Delmont Police Erratic Budget

It is budget season in addition to election season.  In preparation for the budget process, I have been reviewing Actual Money Spent VS Budget Amount from the years 2013-2016 for the months January thru December.  All of this information is publicly available.  For the Delmont population numbers I have used information from US Census Bureau.  Police donation amount information was obtained from Report based on Borough Ledger.

The Delmont Community loves our Police Department and supports it.  In fact since 2009 the community has donated $42,808.34.  Should our love, respect, and admiration for the Delmont Police Department absolve them from budgetary constraints, accountability, fiscal responsibility, and proper oversight from Mayor and Council?

Many people have marked me as anti-police because I have actually questioned and tried to hold them accountable for some of their financial activities.  The Borough Code strictly states, unless an Ordinance from Council is in place, that operations of the Borough Police are under the direct control of the Mayor.  However, as a Councilman, I realize that financial health of the Borough is a major part of my responsibilities. Many currently on Council fancy themselves as "Fiscal Conservatives". It is left up to you to decide if the handling of  Police Budget reflect a Fiscal Conservative approach.  I consider myself more of a Fiscal Realist.  I realize that the services that Local Government provide cost money and money is limited.  We must remember that the function of Local Government is to provide services to  the citizens in their jurisdiction. Police Protection, yes, extremely important, is only one of many services. Coming up with the proper mix is extremely difficult, and personally, I believe it needs to reflect the will of the people to some degree, and not just those with the loudest voices but all citizens of Delmont.  

Description	2013	2014	2015	2016
Population of Delmont	2,659	2,651	2,639	2,622
Budget Amount	$276,933.00	$269,825.00	$290,320.00	$276,440.00
Amount Spent	$272,550.76	$330,573.28	$321,595.88	$299,212.11
Amount Over Budget	Under Budget	$60,748.28	$31,275.88	$22,772.11
Funds Brought into Borough by Fines/Violations	$14,356.59	$8,744.35	$16,174.73	$22,293.47
Cost Per Citizen Per Year	$102.50	$124.69	$121.86	$114.12
Percentage of Total Budget “Self-Funding")	6.01%	3.61%	7.39%	8.96%
Donations	$2,314.00	$1,000.00	$5,300.00	$2,500.00

Delmont Police Department has not operated within its budget since 2013.  In the private sector when an entity expands beyond it stated boundaries it is commonly known as "Creep".  What the chart above shows us is Budget Creep, and the most offensive year was 2014 when that amounted to $60,748.28.  In the private sector any manager that would exceed their established budget by any of the amounts stated would be canned no questions asked.  However, in the public sector I believe that the ultimate responsibility is with officials and what they will tolerate.  What changed at the point in time where Police went from operating in Budget to exceeding established budgets by such a large amount?   

To know what really happened on would have to delve deeper into what was actually happen in Delmont at this time.  There are two personnel changes that occurred around this time.  First Delmont got a new Mayor.  More important from my perspective is this is about the time Council Woman  Matesvac became involved in local politics. The only reason that I have mentioned her by name is in every single discussion were the Police were concerned there is not a voice piece more in favor of any of their requests.  I honestly believe that if the Chief would ask for an air boat to patrol the creek by the Borough garage, her most pressing question would be, "and what size motor do you want for that Chief?" I am not going to digress any further and stray from the topic at hand.  It is also possible that some of these over budgeted amounts were do to other Personnel issues in the Police Department that came very close to making our Borough uninsurable.

If you would go to the Council Meeting and listen to the Police Report you would get the impression that the Police Department was "making" the Borough money.  The source of all this income was stated to be grants, donations, and fines from tickets.  I have never seen any evidence of grant funding, and the donations and fines are figured in the table above in the "Self-Funding" row.  It is important to remember that donations are not necessarily expended in the same year they are received.  I am very pleased that there is an increase in fines but at no time in the last four years did the "Self-Funding" amounts ever reach even 10% of budgeted amount.

Blinded by the Light

Within the last three months our Police Department has received $14,730.78.  This is a huge amount of money and has many on Council believing yes, the Police are making money for the Borough.  That amount of money may make many of you look unfavorably upon this post.  However, we must keep a number of things in mind: 1) The Police Department is getting a new vehicle with an estimated cost of $50,000.  So, this amount is 29.46% the cost of the new vehicle or 4.65% $316,550.00 that was budgeted for 2017 to the Police Department. 2) It is impossible to include donations in the budgeting process. 3) This amount contains two outliers that amount to $10,821.58 which will definitely not happen again and another $1000.00 that is highly questionable.  This would bring the more accurate local donation amount to $2,909.20 which is only through 09/07/2017.  4) The Chief was able to tell the donors what he wanted to use the money for this year, the new vehicle.

This is not meant to undermine the efforts of the Chief in obtaining this amount of money, but when so much money appears so quickly it is hard to maintain the perspective how fast it goes and the fact that money will be needed to pick up the payments on the balance of the vehicle.

Some may wonder why I included the yearly price per resident in the Table?  It is only there to give a perspective on the $25 per year that the Governor wants to charge Municipalities that don't have a local Police department.  No, I am not advocating going to State Police protection only.  I just want to give a fuller perspective from which to gauge expenditures.     

After reading the information presented, I hope you can appreciate the fact that I am not against the Police Department, but very concerned with erratic and over budget expenditures over the years.  I believe that there has been a lack of accountability, fiscal responsibility, and boundary observance.  From the two years that I have been involved I have seen 10's of thousands of dollars shifted from other areas to accommodate police spending.  Past Councils have bragged about not raising taxes, as a result some services, general maintenance and up keep, road work have suffered. I will discuss other budget issues in other posts.  All that I am seeking is a position of Fiscal realism that better distributes funds to be more reflective of Delmont needs, and a level playing field for all Borough employees.  Please contact me with any comments and concerns david4delmont@gmail.com.

  

Is Delmont Under the Influence? What Every Voter Should Know Part2

The issue that will be discussed is Attempting to influence votes thereby effecting election outcomes.  This is a very delicate subject because Freedom to express one's political views is essential to American Democracy.  It is sometimes difficult to 1) Determine when information is meant to influence outcomes, 2) Statements are just reflections of personal opinions, 3) How restricted should persons associated with political municipalities or government employment be restrained from participating in election activities, and 4) What if any actions should be taken against people that cross the line.

Some may try to argue that the situation I am describing would not qualify as "attempting to influence".  I am using the term as meant in daily conversation and not in any type of legal sense that allows for splitting hairs. I am using it in a similar sense to being pregnant.  One is either pregnant, or not and the particular trimester is irrelevant for establishing the fact of pregnancy.  The only reason that I am not naming this person is because all of those who are aware of the occurrence would have to agree to push the issue, and the fact that I heard bits and pieces with my own ears would not stand up in a court under legal scrutiny.

The most disheartening part of this situation is I have a high degree of confidence that every member of Council and even the Mayor was aware of these incidents.  Ironic, how two years ago before I was on the Council, that the body thought it imperative to barr all employees from talking about Borough issues with the public yet looks the other way when one associated with the Borough starts spreading stories about a private citizen candidate.

It is my opinion at best this incident is egregious, unethical, amoral, and a demonstration of poor judgement.  At worse it could be argued that there are more serious and possible legal issues involved.  The incident involves spreading a story about Candidate Pamela Loughner Kelley, and suggesting that because of the incidents in the story one should consider voting for someone else.  In defense of the person spreading the stories, if they deserve any credit for this deplorable act, the stories had some element of truth and could be verified by sources available to most members of the public.  On the flip side, even if true it wasn't about Pam herself but someone close to her.  Secondly, it has absolutely nothing to do with her ability to represent and serve the citizens of Delmont.

So, why would Council be inclined to look the other way?   Do other members of Council fear Pam?  Pam told me once, " I am not running for Council to make friends with its members.  I am running to make a difference and serve the people of Delmont."  I don't mean to be disrespectful in any way to other new candidates, and I told them this to their faces as well, "From a technical perspective Pam is the most qualified candidate running."  In many ways she is more qualified then those of us currently sitting on Council and yes I am including the long sitting veterans.  Although I spent a year studying and trying to learn enough to be a competent Councilmen,  there are several areas where she may be more qualified then me.  I don't view her as a threat but as an asset to the Community.

In many ways it discourages me to write this post.  In general, I have no desire to become actively involved in the campaign process.  I can not let these rumors be spread in good conscience without the people of Delmont knowing what is going on behind the scenes.  Only you can decide on Election Day how you want your government to work.

 

Catch-22:What Every Delmont voter should know part 1

I have been pondering how best to approach this issue for two months.  I decided that the best course of action is to make you the voters aware and you can act as you feel is appropriate.  It is important to remember that legal and moral actions are not always mutually inclusive.  What I mean by that is certain acts may be legal and not ethical, and certain acts may be ethical and not legal within a particular jurisdiction.

I have written before about my perception in many instances Council does not follow the will of the people.  Two years ago when I was elected, I thought that it was the will of the people that I should take an active role in the local government and serve the people the best way I know how.  One of the duties, as I understand them, are to be assigned to various committees as established by statue to take an active role in Local Government.  The Borough Code is silent on how local governing bodies are to organize.  I forget where I read, but it seems to be a principal of Council Organization that each member should be assigned to at least one of the Committees required by Statue.  Common sense would dictate that this is absolutely necessary if a Council person is to fulfill the duties of the office to which the People elected them. The powers that currently hold the authority to organize Delmont's Council have decided to remove me from the only statutory required committee that I served on.  They would still claim that I am a "Member of the Grant Committee".  It is imperative that you, the voters understand 1) This is not an official Committee recognized by the Borough Code.  2) Delmont Council did not formally establish this committee but it grew by custom out of the Mayor's desire to seek financial resources for the Borough and the "members" of this committee from Council were people who volunteered to help the Mayor which were Dave Weber and myself.  Do give the public the illusion that I am somehow fulfilling the duties that the public elected me to do.

If you came to the meeting you know that I did not report, nor will I report in any form to  legitimize this pseudo Committee.  A proper committee should have at least two but no more than three members of Council assigned to it.

I believe excluding me in the the fashion now being practiced is amoral, unethical, and illegal.  My last claim on legality is debatable and could only be decided by a Common Pleas Judge.  I have seriously considered petitioning Commonwealth Court of Common Pleas on this issue but have not for the following reasons:

1. Courts do not like to interfere in local government operations unless they have compelling reasons.  I believe that this test is met, but please read on.
2. If I would start a legal proceeding I would literally be fighting City Hall.  Valuable Resources of our Borough would be shifted the Solicitor to defend my action, although I believe any good lawyer would readily admit that exclusion of any council member from a formal committee assignment is a clear violation of the intent of the Borough Code.  Even if our solicitor agrees with my position, if those in "leadership" positions would wish to dispute it, He would be forced to defend the ludicrous position until the end.
3. The length of time required may make it a mute point.  I only have two years left, and there is an election cycle coming up that could change this power structure. 
4. The final and perhaps most important reason is I have faith in the voters of Delmont to make the changes necessary to solve this issue without outside help.