It’s Amateur Hour for Wilmington City Government — Again

Filed in Delaware by on June 24, 2013

Last Thursday, the Wilmington City Council introduced a bill to make the first amendment to the newly approved City Budget. This new amendment would restore the $300K that was eliminated from the Mayor’s Contingency Fund and adds back $80K for a position in the Finance Department, and:

The amendment also would restore $89,000 to the Human Resources Department and $18,000 to the Planning Department. A $250,000 allocation for an enhanced trash and recycling program will be reappropriated, while $142,000 earmarked for small business development will be reduced to $50,000.

Should the amendment pass, next year’s budget will increase by about $487,000 to $145.6 million and leave Wilmington with a surplus of $108,141.

Got that? After a process where the Wilmington City Council actually looked like they were serious about some budget discipline (with the exception of their own $250K contingency fund), and serious about their role as a co-equal branch of the government — someone over there decided that they needed to replay a poker hand that they decidedly won. And decidedly won mostly on the merits. And this deal isn’t a compromise, either. They are simply replaying a hand to capitulate — and to get nothing for that capitulation. They certainly aren’t helping out taxpayers here, they are blowing off their co-equal bonafides and have signaled to an awful lot of people in the City that we’re pretty much on our own here. I don’t know what the vote on this will be at the next Council Meeting, but I think that it is a good bet that most of these folks will vote for additional budget expenditures that accomplish nothing. It’s a shame, really, but Amateur Hour isn’t a new place for City Council and I guess we have 3 and a half years to live with a group of people who will be paying close attention to constituent service ( a few exceptions to this expectation), but who aren’t going to be strong partners in governing. Council President Gregory is calling this move a “compromise”, but City Council gets nothing out of this deal — other than a black mark for failed leadership.

Then, we have the clusterf*** for a West Center City event that has been going on annually for 3 years. Instead of advising the group involved of new rules and/or requirements and working with them to get them satisfied, they mostly dragged their feet, provided inscrutable answers and definitively told the group NO 3 hours before the event. Amateur Hour here revolves around City Departments not understanding that they are responsible for some transition too — if rules, requirements, partnerships change, then it is up to these departments to work to communicate these to their constituents ASAP and do what they can to work with those constituents to acclimate to the new deal. This is a customer service failure from top to bottom and this event was in the works long enough that any potential issues could have been ironed out cleanly. Then, a Parks and Rec employee who also works with this group gets fired after she attends the event. As a volunteer and participant in this group — not as a city representative. At City Council on Thursday, Council President Theo Gregory hinted that the Administration may be working at being more responsive to Council Members who voted against the override of the budget. No one knows if this is exactly true, but there are Councilpeople who are wondering if things are happening or not happening based on their votes. I have no idea if this is the case, but even letting service get to a point where people can wonder about this seems to be one more failure of client service.

Because at bottom, the people being ill-served by all of this are the people who pay taxes in the city — the people they most need to keep.

About the Author ()

"You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas." -Shirley Chisholm

Comments (9)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. AGovernor says:

    Thanks Cassandra, I hadn’t read the amendment, just the summary.
    I didn’t realize the entire $300,000 was going back into the contingency fund.

    I am not sure why they would reallocate the funds for enhanced trash and recycle as there are definitely issues in some parts of town with trash management and the city should be making improvements. I also think reducing the amount of money to help small businesses is short sited. It is evident that small businesses are making a mark in the city and encouraging more rather than limiting help can go a long way to improving the economic climate of this city.

    I like you am wholly disappointed in this turn of events. I do believe some tweaking was necessary, but as you say they are giving too much. Not sure there are any leaders anywhere in city government. Hoping I am wrong and that someone emerges as a leader over the next few years.

  2. cassandra m says:

    I think that the trash item was to extend some pilot initiatives, but I could be wrong. What I wish they’d do is start sending out inspectors after 6 on trash days and write tickets for the folks who can’t seem to put their trash out appropriately.

  3. AGovenor says:

    I like that idea.

  4. cassandra_m says:

    The Finance Committee voted to only approve two of the items that were being considered — $80K for a Finance Department person and $18K for a Planning person. The $300K Mayor’s contingency fund and the $89K for an HR person were not approved.

  5. AGovernor says:

    Thursday nights meeting might be interesting or like the veto over ride may extremely quick.

    Looking forward to the administrations response.

    I watched the Finance Committee meeting on-line. There was very little discussion, but Matlusky’s statement did not sit too well with Councilman Bud Freel.

  6. LeBay says:

    Bud Freel can piss up a rope. I met that guy once (more than 20 years ago) and I still have the douche chills. He is the epitome of a shitheel “woomingtin” politician.

  7. cassandra_m says:

    What did Matlusky say that disturbed Bud Freel?

  8. cassandra_m says:

    OK so apparently Matlusky read a statement, the gist of it was — we are only here to watch you fix your illegal mistake. Bud Freel asked them (there were a few Administration representatives in the room) if they could talk about each of the line items, and each time they weren’t ready to talk about it. There’s more, but the video of the meeting isn’t up.

  9. AGovenor says:

    Looks like a hard 3.5 years ahead for the citizens of Wilmington.

    On the bright side there might be a good bit of fodder for blogs.

    Sad.