Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Roanoke needs a chief financial officer
Editorial commentary
Recent contributions
- Can we be a two-trolley town?
- Striving for civility
- School funding no fantasy
- Pesticide board's work will continue through merger
- Commentary archive
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Robert Craig
Craig, of Roanoke, is a retired Marine Corps officer who spent 25 years working in financial management in both the private and public sectors.
At a Roanoke city manager public input meeting on Oct. 15, the analogy between our strong city manager form of government and a corporation was frequently invoked.
City council makes policy. The underlying assumption is council is qualified. The city manager implements policy. The city manager suggests initiatives to the council. In a perfect world, the city manager presents all the risks, rewards and outcome probabilities and council members completely understand.
If that had occurred we might not be cursed with the financial albatross named Countryside, a $4 million undeveloped piece of dirt off Interstate 581, Miller's Hill and a (potential) million-dollar liability, etc.
Unfortunately, we hold popularity elections for class president and (student) council members who promise to move us forward, not qualified candidates who will ensure the city's infrastructure and fiscal well-being are maintained.
The three requirements to be a council member are: be alive, be an of-age resident of the city and be among the top three vote-getters in the election. Having qualifications and common sense should be added.
Allegedly, council's lagging performance is caused by high turnover of incumbents, resulting in a lack of institutional memory. In exchange for $14,000 and perks in taxpayer money, new council members should have real qualifications and be expected to be up to speed quickly.
We have a director of finance who is on the same organizational line as the city manager. We don't hear much from the director of finance, who performs the accounting function, with the additional responsibility of overseeing the sale of bonds. If the director of finance has a public voice, it seems to be (mostly) brief reports, at the end of council meetings, that things are hunky dory.
The city desperately needs a chief financial officer. This is not a cosmetic change I'm advocating. The CFO would be responsible for all financial functions: budget, accounting, audit and management, which are now split between the city manager and the director of finance -- and not adequately presented to the council in understandable terms.
The CFO would advise the council of the financial implications of all actions, independently of the city manager. Often the advice might be: "You can do that, but what are you going to give up to do so?"
If council had been told that previously, we might not be eyeball deep in debt.
With a chief financial officer worth the name, council would already have a plan for the $50 million bond refinancing authorized Oct. 22. I doubt six of the seven council members know what they authorized with the resolution, yet millions of dollars are at stake. What's wrong with this picture?
The city has serious problems. They are not intractable and are principally financial right now.
However, unless we have council members with serious qualifications, instead of someone who thinks pizza trucks improve our quality of life -- as David Trinkle does -- we're not going to be a serious city and the problems will get worse.
