. . . For those who don't like graphs and numbers, the bottom line is that, while we have been treated to expectations of deficit spending each year from 2011 through 2016, we have not actually spent more than we took in (after money from the sale of the water/sewer utilities is accounted for). In addition, projections of future fund balances made before the budget is finalized, always get substantially improved a year later.
Every year the budget process begins mid-summer. Year end fund balances are estimated at that time. So, the numbers are estimates of money coming in and money going out in 6- 18 months in advance. The budget book contains a summary of the previous few years' budgets, moving from 'adopted budget' to 'revised budget' to 'actual budget' as the years progress. I pulled these numbers and found that the adopted budget nearly always predicted deficit or near-deficit spending each year. By the time actual revenue and expenditure numbers where known, the bleak picture had not developed . . .See Andrews' complete analysis here. It's well worth the read. It's too bad the corrupt slating process prevented Pat from becoming a member of the City-County Council. She's someone who can look beyond the lies constantly being fed to us to find the truth.