by J. Brooks Terry
Staff Writer
The City Council wants a sharper eye on money moves made by the Mayor’s Office and that’s exactly what they’re expected to get.
Legislation that would limit Mayor John Peyton’s fiscal flexibility has garnered support from three of the Council’s standing committees and, barring complications, should get the votes it needs to make it a law at tonight’s Council meeting.
According to the City’s Charter, Peyton can transfer dollars available in the City’s budget between any two departments without the Council’s approval or knowledge. After he used more than $2 million that had been set aside for Juvenile Justice to pay for the Feb. 15 and March 29 special elections, the Council reeled.
“I think it’s just one of those situations where we didn’t realize that he had the power to do that,” said Reggie Fullwood, who chairs the Council’s Finance Committee. “I personally think it’s a great idea to do this. It helps promote the healthy system of checks and balances that we need.”
Once enacted, money moves of more than $500,000 would need Finance Committee pre-approval. Legislation would need to be filed before anything more than $1 million can be moved.
“We just want to be sure we are responsible when we look at the different funding issues coming our way,” Council member Sharon Copeland said. Copeland is among the bill’s four co-sponsors. “Every year we, as the Council, have to review and approve a budget. If (Peyton) can move things around so easily, I think it nullifies us.”
In 2003 the Mayor’s Office transferred dollars 421 times. Of those moves, 21 were for more than $1 million. Of Peyton’s 489 money moves last year, 17 exceeded $1 million.
When asked about the Council’s plans to limit budgetary transfers last month, Peyton advisor Susie Wiles said the administration was “prepared to be governed by whatever rules (the Council) puts in place.”
Fullwood said little, if any, discussion will take place about the policy change tonight.
“I think the genuine feeling on the Council is that it’s the right time to do this,” he said. “The necessary discussion has taken place and I don’t think either office has a problem with it.”
Copeland agreed.
“Again, this is more of a precaution than anything else,” she said. “It’s not that we don’t trust the Mayor’s Office, but we do we feel like we need to know what’s going on and we need to have some kind of say in those decisions.”