Twp. budget hearings leave financial stones unturned

The Township Council's effort to educate residents by requesting township department heads defend their 2006 budgets during televised council meetings sounded like a good idea, but unfortunately, in implementation, the idea fell short.

Based on the budget hearings held by the council, a resident may believe the township has only six departments - treasury, recreation, public works, construction, purchasing and police - because the directors of those departments are the only people who were interviewed during this process.

Brick's land use and affordable housing departments have a combined $500,000 budget, yet its director, Michael Fowler, was not interviewed by the council.

Why?

The Municipal Clerk's Office, headed by Virginia Lampman, services hundreds of township residents every week. They go to her office for marriage licenses, dog tags, garage sale permits, and they probably go to her first even if they are directed to another township department, yet no one asked Lampman to present her budget or what services her office provides to the township.

Just because council members may have found Lampman's or Fowler's budget requests sound doesn't mean they should not have interviewed them. Lampman already attends every council meeting. Residents probably would have found her presentation the most helpful in terms of useful information.

The council has also made an issue regarding the 61 merit raises granted to township workers by the administration last year in addition to their contracted 4 percent annual salary increases.

One of the reasons the council conducted the budget hearings was so the directors could defend those merit raises. Some of Lampman's and Fowler's employees received merit raises. Why single out employees in some departments and not in others?

To make this process fair, every department head should have presented his or her budget on television.

Police Chief Ronald Dougard presented his $13 million budget at a caucus meeting and not on camera.

Why?

Business and Finance Committee Chairman Stephen C. Acropolis said the hearings were televised "so people can see what we do here. Obviously, people know what the police department does."

That's a poor reason not to air the chief's presentation.

People may know what the police department does, but they may not know what the police department spends, and they still wouldn't even if they listened to the tape of the meeting because that figure was never mentioned.

Most people may say that those dollars is money well spent, but if the council is looking to make Brick's government more transparent, then a budget total should have been mentioned at a budget hearing.

Aside from some council members requesting budget totals, only Councilwoman Ruthanne Scaturro asked specific budget line item questions of the directors.

If the council continues with this process next year, it should interview all department heads, and all on camera. It could set aside nights specifically for budget hearings - nights where a council meeting does not fall - and interview several department heads at a time instead of cramming a budget hearing and council meeting in one night.