City Post $3.6M Budget Surplus

The city has posted a $3.6M budget surplus, Rachana Dixit reports for the Daily Progress, a result of spending $4.8M less than planned and taking in $1.2M less than planned. (That’s out of a $126M budget, or a 2.8% overrun.) The city plans to use $2M of that towards capital improvements, with the balance going to a bunch of programs, including $750 bonuses to employees who have been at their jobs for at least a year. (Virginia is doing the same thing—state employees all get a bonus of 3% of their salary this month.) Council will vote on that on Monday. This is the fourth consecutive year of budget surpluses.

The city’s budget is available online, for those who care for the details.

7 thoughts on “City Post $3.6M Budget Surplus”

  1. Pretty outrageous that they pluck more from our pocket than needed to run the city properly, then waste the overage rather than return it.

    A few years ago they actually asked us for suggestions how they could blow it.

    We have a major expense coming up for a dubious school scheme to undo the last school scheme that was a major expense. They talk about raising taxes to pay for it.

    City employees getting a bonus? Is there a published list of name & salary so we can see the whole picture? Or is UVa the only public employer willing to do that?

  2. Is there any regulation that would prevent them from investing the funds? When I have a windfall that is what I might do, but does a municipality get penalized by the state or federal government if they do something prudent like this?

  3. I think capital improvements might well be considered an investment (presuming they’re necessary).

    As to the bonuses, they’re all getting $750 if they’ve been in their jobs over a years; all you need is a list of employees. According to the 2010-2011 budget there are 917 full time equivalent City employees and 786 school employees. I’m not entirely clear whether the school employees will get the bonus but according to the figures in the DP article it looks like they won’t.

  4. I may be wrong but didn’t the city have a $7M surplus just a couple of years ago? What ever became of that surplus? I for one would like a reduction in my real estate taxes, even if its just a one shot deal.

  5. I’m not entirely clear whether the school employees will get the bonus but according to the figures in the DP article it looks like they won’t.

    When the city had their annual budget surplus last year- and gave their employees a similar bonus last year (500 dollars that time I think). The city officials specifically said that the City School employees were not covered by that bonus.

    The School employees (teachers at least) get regular raises whereas the city employees did not.

    This last excuse was the main one for why it was right and appropriate (I disagree) to give part of the money, from the over-taxation of residents and city property, owners to the city employees.

  6. According to John Pfalz, speaking at Monday’s Council meeting, over the past 5 years the city has had $35.4M in surpluses total. He then asked Council to tell what was done with the money. Council then asked the acting City Manager. He said he would give them a report later.

Comments are closed.