Council members debate budget items

The Monroe City Council continued its review of the 2025 preliminary budget at its Oct. 21 meeting. Before the public hearing, Monroe City Manager Tony Cardone reported that the current budget is $397,884 over the tax cap and he is working with various departments to lower that number. Although there was no public comment on the budget, Council members Mary Bingham and Maureen Richardson each expressed concerns about the proposed proposals.

Bingham brought up a question from a resident at the previous meeting about the cost of the city’s comprehensive plan. Cardone said the plan will take more than 12 months and be submitted over several years and that the entire plan will not be included in this budget. Bingham clarified that she believes residents are concerned that the city does not have enough money to implement the comprehensive plan and that more money should be added to the budget to ensure it can begin sooner rather than later. Richardson also weighed in, saying she believes the city is long overdue on its promise to renew the comprehensive plan every five years. Cardone disagreed, saying the city was less than two years overdue.

Bingham also disputed what she said were unfair fees for water district residents to contribute to the city’s solar farm as part of shared services. She said residents are charged double and even triple for this service because these fees are included in their dues, both to the city and as a member of a water and/or sewer district. Bingham said she disagreed with the initial allocation of funds for the solar farm and contacted State Senator James Skoufis’ office for advice.

Cardone claimed that in a previous meeting, Bingham agreed with the way things were handled and the proper allocation of funds. He also shared his view that their objection was based on a resident who did not want the solar farm in the city.

During her budget review, Richardson questioned why the city was paying Cardone $18,500 for his role as budget officer, saying that was high for this area. She claimed that the city once held a comptroller position that was paid at about the same rate as the second budget officer is paid now: $4,000. Cardone said that this was not true and that the comptroller’s salary was about $70,000 and that the budget officer position was created when the comptroller no longer worked for the city. Still, Richardson claimed the $18,500 was a lot of money for a budget officer’s salary since that person is also the city manager.

Richardson also questioned the $990,000 fund balance and argued the city needs to do more to reduce operating costs. Cardone claimed her concerns arose from concerns about her electability and asked her how she would like him to reduce that number. The supervisor also said increasing spending in areas such as benefits and pensions has impacted what the city can provide under its discretionary spending. He added that he has spoken to seven other supervisors who are facing similar challenges.

Richardson addressed the city attorney’s budget, claiming city attorney Brian Nugent only represents the Republican majority on the board. Cardone contradicted her statement and claimed that Richardson continued to spread false rhetoric.

Nugent said that he is the City Council’s attorney and that if three board members direct the attorney to do something, he is obligated to do so and that he is obligated to do so if two members instruct him to do something without the third person forming a majority would not do that. The attorney also made a claim, which Richardson denied, that the councilwoman said that if the city hired another attorney and she disagreed with their opinion, she would want another attorney.

In other legal matters, Bingham urged the board to consider a tender for a contract attorney, arguing that the proposed budget’s $77,000 for the position was too high. Bingham said the amount represents a $20,000 increase over last year’s budget. Cardone told Bingham she could do so if she wanted to make an offer, and the board approved a motion to do so.

Other budget matters discussed included the fate of the Flagship Cinemas; both Bingham and Richardson found that revenue was zero. Richardson said the public needs to be aware that the theater doesn’t make money and that while they understand its importance to the community, they also want to be aware of the costs and loss of potential tax revenue from the property . Cardone pointed out that the theater’s problems stemmed primarily from difficulties recovering from the pandemic and that the matter should not have been discussed publicly. Richardson and Bingham disagreed, pointing out that they brought up the issue because of budget timing.

Bingham also expressed concern about the proposed salaries, noting that some departments were seeking a 10% increase, while others she said were more realistic at 4%.

The board voted to keep the public hearing on the 2025 budget open until Nov. 7.