Search CL:

CL DEALS


TODAY’S CREATIVE LOVING PROFILE

Hangover

Shirley Franklin's sweet victory may have a sour aftertaste -- Atlanta is almost bankrupt.
Published 11.14.01
Jim Stawniak
Shirley Franklin was all smiles at her victory party on election night
Here's a quiz. From the clues below, name a great American city in trouble.

Even though it's known as a regional hub of commerce and culture, it's actually a poor city with a wide gap between the haves and have-nots.

The delivery of its city services is plagued by poor management, the causes of which are years of cronyism and the departure of qualified leaders.

It uses money that is supposed to be dedicated to certain capital projects for random expenses that have popped up over the years because of mismanagement and overspending in other areas of the city's budget.

It is facing a multi-million dollar budget shortfall.

It is plagued by a federal investigation that reaches the highest levels of city government.

It has used up much of its cash reserves, which causes some people to think that it teeters on the brink of insolvency.

It doesn't collect its taxes and fees.

Its political leaders have lacked the political will to make difficult choices about its budget -- from raising taxes to cutting jobs and city services -- in the face of dire economic conditions not of its own making.

It has been taken over by the state, because it could not solve its own financial problems.

Atlanta? Nah, the last question points to another city: Miami during the late 1990s.

But the parallels are striking and disturbing between the Miami that went bust and the Atlanta on the edge of financial collapse.

Here's why: The same economic conditions affecting the city of Miami before it went bankrupt and had its finances taken over by Florida's state government exist right now in Atlanta. The depletion of the reserves, the inability to collect taxes and fees and financial mismanagement -- they're all there.

That is not to say the sky is falling, but it is awful heavy and some of the strings are breaking.

After the sunny glow of winning a relatively easy race against a seemingly overconfident opponent wears off, incoming mayor Shirley Franklin must move quickly to map out a new financial path for the city. (That is, of course, if a Tuesday recount doesn't put her plans on hold.) If she can't, she risks bankruptcy or other financial consequences -- such as the lowering of the city's bond rating. And the city needs to keep its stable bond status, because it will require tons of state and federal cash to finance a slew of infrastructure projects, such as fixing its failing sewer system.

On the campaign trail, Franklin has seemed convinced that there's enough waste in city government -- the very processes by which work is organized and carried out -- to cut so that raising taxes or firing employees won't be necessary. According to experts, she's wrong, and one of the main reasons Miami got into its calamitous situation was because its leaders lacked the political will to make difficult decisions.

ON THE EDGE
There are significant differences between the financial situations in Atlanta and Miami, differences that clearly suggest that Atlanta isn't yet in the same already-capsized boat Miami found itself in during 1996. Miami had very few revenue options; Atlanta does. Miami couldn't levy a sales tax; Atlanta has a sales tax, though it relies too heavily on it. Also, people were leaving Miami and its property tax rate was near the maximum allowed by the state, so there was nowhere for it to go when it needed more money; Atlanta's population and tax roll are growing.

What's more, Miami's bond rating was reduced to junk status, there were no cash reserves, and the city faced an unfillable $68 million financial hole.

Atlanta's bond rate is at worst only threatened -- for now. The pit here is $45 million. Reserves have evaporated, but with effort they can be replenished.

That said, the similarities between Miami and Atlanta are frightening, and they portend dismal things for the city's financial future.

"If you listen to the radio and read the newspaper, we're going to hell," says David Corbin, the city's chief financial officer. Then he laughs heartily.

Others aren't laughing so much.

"It's unusual," understates former mayor Sam Massell about the budget shortfall.

City Council President and, as of Friday afternoon, mayoral candidate Robb Pitts, goes farther. "I think we are in serious trouble," he says. "There will be a balanced budget, but the question is how it will be balanced."

Corbin discounts the doomsayers.

"We are not insolvent," he concludes. "We are not going bankrupt."

To be fair, some of the problems with the budget are out of the city's control. Because of the economic slowdown and the fallout from the Sept. 11 attacks, sales tax revenues are down, exactly how far down Corbin isn't exactly sure yet, but revenues are off by about 7 percent across the state.

To further complicate matters, in the wake of the disaster, the city is spending $700,000 per week more than it budgeted to pay for hard-to-justify 12-hour police shifts. Thankfully, all of the money for cops isn't being sucked out of operating funds. Some of it comes from an enterprise fund, which covers infrastructure expenditures, but the OT is still a financial hit.

The budget is in bad enough shape that in October Corbin asked the council's Finance/Executive Committee to allow him to use the money left in the reserves to fund the city's operating costs.

The economy and the terrorist attacks account for part of Atlanta's fiscal problems, but most of the budget shortfall is the result of two primary things. Corbin explains: During 2001, the council authorized spending $20 million more than was in the budget - for things such as bonuses for cops. Some of those bills are spread out over 2002 -- so-called sunken costs. Then there's a $16 million hit the city took to pay for a new traffic court building.

But Atlanta during the late 1990s enjoyed $25 million to $40 million carry-overs from the previous year's budget.

"Next year, we will not have any cash carried over," says District 7 City Councilman Lee Morris, the city's most fiscally conservative voice.

"That's astounding," says one local economist who declined to be named. For an operating budget the size of Atlanta's -- about $470 million -- there should be a carryover of at least $30 million, especially when you consider the amount of new construction in the city, the economist says.

But the budget problems don't just stem from one year's worth of trouble. There is a pattern of mismanagement, of shell game economics.

  • Take the Department of Corrections, Morris says. In 2000, it overspent its budget by $9 million, a faux pas for which no one was penalized or even publicly admonished. During this year's budget process, Morris suggested giving corrections a realistic budget, but that would have meant money for corrections would have had to come from somewhere else in the budget. It wasn't done, so in August, Corbin came to the council to tell them corrections had overspent its allotment by $8 million -- again.

  • Then there's the $2,000 bonuses promised to cops in 2000 but taken out of this year's park improvement fund in June. The city had to take the roughly $2 million for the bonuses out of the park fund, because it had spent money allocated for cops on the Corrections Department overrun.

  • The construction of a new Atlanta traffic court building is another example. There was a $8 million fund set aside for the traffic court, but the money may have been counted as part of the city's reserves instead of being stored in a separate fund, Morris says.

  • Finally, there's the $1.9 million the city still owes American Computer Technology Inc. as part of a $2.9 million settlement approved by the City Council in late September for Y2K work ACT did for the city during 1999. The city, fearing it needed every nickel of city money to pay for operating expenses, balked a number of times at paying ACT. The next million dollar payment is due Dec. 1, and another $900,000 is due before Dec. 31. If the city doesn't pay, Mark Trigg, an attorney for ACT, says the company will ask the court to set aside the settlement and pay ACT the $6 million worth of Y2K work it performed. Trigg isn't very optimistic his client will be paid.

    "The city hasn't been entirely reliable in the past," he says.

    Every year, Morris says, the council's Finance/Executive Committee makes changes to make the numbers in Mayor Bill Campbell's budget work, and every year "the full council trots out and [approves] the original budget."

    Morris' comments get to what Campbell's detractors have complained about for some time. His budgets are of the rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul variety, and there is rampant waste in Atlanta government that hasn't been addressed.

    David Sjoquist, the director of the Fiscal Research Program at Georgia State University points out that all these problems have occurred during the unprecedented prosperity of the late 1990s -- while the city has been growing for the first time in 30 years.

    "There's no underlying structural reason why the budget is in the condition it's in," he says. "They've been giving raises and at the same time cutting property tax rates. That's a fundamental problem."

    Franklin says it's worrisome to discover that during what has been an economic boom time, for the city and the country, there is a budget shortfall that isn't uncovered until the end of the year.

    "Common sense tells you there's reason for concern" about the city's financial situation, she says.

    Corbin himself suggests there's plenty of fact behind the argument that the city government is wasting money. He says a performance audit recently was completed on the Bureau of Motor Transport. That's the department accused by Pitts as being the administration's junk pile for unqualified but politically connected employees. Corbin says the changes the audit suggests in Motor Transport could save Atlanta $14 million over the next four years. Some of those changes have been made, Corbin says, but the question is whether all the changes will be made if well-connected people have to lose their jobs.

    Overall, Atlanta employs some 8,000 people. Similarly sized cities such as Miami -- about 3,300 employees -- and Sacramento, Calif. -- about 5,000 employees -- get by on far fewer. Atlanta during the Massell administration from 1968-72 employed around 3,000 people, and that's when the city's population topped half a million.

    Both Pitts and Gloria Bromell-Tinubu, the third candidate for mayor, talked about reducing the City Hall workforce, claiming there are millions to be saved by cutting the fat. Franklin never made any commitments about job cuts. She might have a difficult time pushing for them, because city employees provided a firm base of support for her during her campaign.

    REMEDIES
    Forty-five million dollars represents about a tenth of the city's annual operational budget. If Franklin doesn't want to abandon the idea of reserves, destroy the city's healthy bond rating and run a deficit -- as the city is doing this year -- she can take a number of immediate steps to fix the budget.

    Like Corbin says, the city needs to either cut costs or increase revenues by 10 percent. The most obvious way to jack up revenue is to raise property taxes. For years, the city has been rolling back the millage rate, effectively reducing property taxes. Corbin estimates the city could bring in an additional $9 million this year if the rate were to simply remain the same. That's because the assessed value of property in Atlanta is rising.

    The problem with leaving the millage rate the same is that it will effectively increase property taxes, which has to be publicized, and Atlanta residents won't like it. The city faces a tougher fight to actually raise the millage rate. Any tax increases could exacerbate gentrification -- as wealthy new residents move into old Atlanta neighborhoods and fix up houses, property values and taxes for long-time residents soar -- though one local expert says it shouldn't worsen the problem too much. Also, with the increased unemployment that comes with a recession, it will be harder for the city to collect taxes, Sjoquist says.

    A second alternative is to aggressively pursue uncollected taxes and fees. Pitts says there's millions in uncollected sanitation fees alone. The next mayor and City Council need to go after these bills, Morris says, to get "tough on the deadbeats." If residents don't pay, slap a lien on their property.

    Again, though, there must be the will to be so aggressive. When the finance office sent out letters -- just letters -- threatening liens earlier this year, council members and community groups were outraged, Morris says.

    "They said, 'Don't say things like that to these poor people,'" Morris recalls.

    As Morris' comment illustrates, Franklin may need more political will to cut costs than to raise taxes. Streamlining should be an easy way to save a million here or a million there, but generating real savings is going to mean layoffs or program cutbacks.

    WHAT WILL SHE DO?
    Franklin promises to audit upon entering office. That was a safe thing to say during the election. Nobody gets angry about audits. It doesn't cost votes.

    No one, not even Franklin, knows how she'll pay for the audits -- another bill for a fiscal house that's in anything but good order. She's suggested she'll seek donations to help fund them.

    But the part of the audit plan that you can't disagree with is that it should mean that Franklin and the rest of Atlanta might finally know how much money the city actually has, where it comes from and where it goes -- questions for which Campbell's foes on City Council have for years said they can't get answered. As Franklin says, audits are the only way to figure out exactly what's happened to the city's finances.

    "I don't wish to be in her shoes," Sjoquist says about the budget debacle Franklin faces. "You cannot in one year build up the reserve to where they were" and balance the budget without budget cuts or tax hikes.

    And Corbin's plan is to build up the city's reserve -- as he calls it, its "trust fund" -- back to $31 million. It will be part of the budget. Cash reserves are important. They help protect bond ratings. Standard & Poor's currently gives Atlanta a double-A stable rating, which was an improved outlook the city achieved just six months ago. It's not the best bond rating -- AAA -- but it's solid, and Atlanta needs it to get favorable interest rates on government loans. The city will need loans to deal with its pending infrastructure projects, such as a multibillion-dollar sewer system fix.

    Franklin must deal with the budget crisis decisively or risk bringing to a quick close the usual honeymoon between the mayor's office and the City Council. An impasse will endanger the city's future economic health. She might be able to find millions in savings, but it's unlikely waste reduction will be enough. She's going to face decisions that people won't like, nasty elixir for a malady that seems to get worse every day.

    Remember, Atlanta is only a detail or two from becoming the new Miami.

    kevin.griffis@creativeloafing.com

    YOUR COMMENT

  • TOOLS

    Save this story Email this story to a friend Print this story
    SHARE: