By Antonio D. French
Filed Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 8:58 AM
From the Comptroller's Office... Labels: Comptroller, Press_Releases
The 2007 fiscal year ended June 30 revealing a $2.98 million general fund budget surplus. Comptroller Darlene Green attributed the surplus to some higher than estimated revenue source receipts and allocated funds left unspent by some city departments. 
"We beat last year’s earnings tax receipts by 3.6 percent or $4.7 million," said Green. "This really helped cover some revenue sources that were down from last year, like the amusement tax receipts."
Other notable revenue sources that beat FY 06 returns were intergovernmental receipts that include gasoline and auto sales taxes and prisoner housing reimbursements (up $5.0 million or 21.2%); hotel and restaurant tax (up $588,000 or 5.1%); and sales tax (up $1.4 million or 3.0%). Property tax receipts were also up 8.3 percent, but that was attributed mostly to an increase in delinquent tax payments.
City Budget Director Paul Payne agrees that the 2007 fiscal year surplus is a welcome change over past years.
"The surplus, while modest, is a positive development. It says good things about the city's economic growth, which along with continued vigilance on spending, are the keys for ensuring future budgets can meet the city's needs," said Payne.
The year end results cited above are unaudited and represent preliminary calculations. The official, audited results will be published later this year in the city’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
This report will be available online at www.stlouis.missouri.org/citygov/comptroller when it is completed.
9 Comments:
Any word on earnings tax receipts?
7/24/2007 12:09 PM
please retract above, sorry. Reading comprehension must get better.
7/24/2007 12:13 PM
Does that include the money owed to the City Police Pension?
7/24/2007 12:33 PM
Ask that damn Francis Slay about money owed the Police Pension Fund,he is the one making the decision not to add to the fund!
7/24/2007 4:37 PM
We will see if this money ends up anywhere after the Police/Fire protest at City Hall on Friday Morning, July 27, 2007.
7/24/2007 9:20 PM
Maybe Slay can start cutting the FAT in city hall and take some of those people's salary's and put it towards the underpaid members of the Police and Fire Department, who respond to more incidents and deal with the most harsh conditions than anyother city in the state and in some major cities. Also put money to those who have served the city and their citizens for years and fund their pensions and retirement funds.
Ever wonder why these departments are understaffed and its becoming harder and harder to hire public servants? Just look at the tired faces of those who have fought for years for some competitve pay and benefits, all the while Slay can smile and sit in the sun and assure citizens they can take their doggies to dinner.
7/24/2007 9:27 PM
The higher than expected earnings are most likely from the building division. The inspectors have a new law passed by the board of Alderman that allows these low level employees to harass people with stronger police powers. The inspectors can now assess fines according to their opinion, no court system needed
7/25/2007 7:02 AM
Just look at the tired faces of those who have fought for years for some competitve pay and benefits, all the while Slay can smile and sit in the sun and assure citizens they can take their doggies to dinner.
Yet they still come to work. Why is that? If their pay/benefits is not competitive, they, if they are rational, should be looking for other jobs. (Some may do it out of vocation (police/fire/teachers), but many do it because they need a job.) The free market, for labor, still applies. I contend that their pay/benefits is satisfactory to the workers. Or at least not unsatisfactory enough for them to work elsewhere.
The pay may not be great, but the benefits and the holidays are better than the private sector. The job security is certainly better than the private sector. Government job applicants know, or should know, this going in.
Some people make a conscious choice for that trade off. 'Hey, I'll never be rich, but I'll always have a job and have a decent pension.' There are faults in the above reasoning as well. It should be noted that, as the private sector goes to 401(k)s, IRAs and such, public sector workers still get traditional pensions.
As for the pensions, fund them, the city has got to live up to its obligations. I would love to see the city pay a lump sum to get these obligations off the books(while still having the workers get their pensions), but that isn't going to happen any time soon.
7/25/2007 8:56 AM
There is no surplus. If you put together all the things said up to mow, the pensions, salaries and defered capital improvements, you have now not only killed the surplus, but the city is in a deficit. See how this works!
7/26/2007 9:33 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home