Right. And that's what she's afraid. She says, it's like when they turn 18, then they become adult criminals, go to adult prisons. So, lots of parent are just looking for help and support. And maybe it's other ways we can do that and not so much through the courts.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo. 2267 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
I think sometimes we forget about the... Word I'm looking for here... the state commitment to the courts. Judge, could you please take us back and bring us current why we don't get assistance? I mean, the state doesn't want to pay for the police patrols on the expressway. They don't want to participate and, in my opinion, adequately fund the courts. So, for the record, I think it would be nice to go back and explain the relationship between the state, the state and the court, the funding that you get, the funding that you don't get. I just need maybe a few minutes to refresh my memory on exactly where some of this money that we're struggling to get is 2268 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 supposed to be coming from.
Well, Councilman, I'll take you back just the one year ago when the three of us were sitting here before this body.
Just one year ago, the very first comment in our testimony was, the funding of the courts, which is the third branch of the state government, should be taken up by the state legislature. And the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in the Allegheny decisions, have ordered the state legislature to fund the courts throughout the state. And last year at this time, Councilman, you requested, and I joined with you, in a joint resolution that was passed by 17 members of City Council and by the First 2269 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 Judicial District. We signed off on it, working my staff with your staff. And I sent a copy of that resolution to Chief Justice Ralph Cappy, and you sent a copy of the resolution to the state legislative leaders. And I can tell you that I have not received any responses from the state legislative leaders at all. But we agree with you that this is something that should be funded by the state. The Supreme Court itself has ordered that. And I believe this is a legislative issue which perhaps you may be in a better position to handle than the courts.
Judge, for the record, could you talk about the scope of the financial part of it. In other words, I'm not suggesting that the state pay for all. But based on the Supreme Court's decision, what exactly should the state be doing? What should the City be doing? What kind of a balance is there here? What kind of financial budget would it be? If it was working the way it should work, 2270 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 would the state be funding 100 percent, 90 percent, 80 percent? Where exactly would we be? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Point of information, Councilman. I think I know exactly where you were going with this. I think that there was a decision that in lieu of the state assuming the full financial responsibility, that they did pick up a portion which I think was the court administrators, salaries of the court administrators. I think that's -- I think that's what you may be looking for. I don't want to try to read your mind, but I do know a little bit about that. And maybe you might want to...
That's exactly where -- Out of this we did get something.
From Councilman DiCicco's point. But I'd like to know, in your opinion what should the state be contributing 2271 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 to your total budget? What should the City be contributing? Based on a decision of a state supreme court, where exactly should we be today if the state complied with the Supreme Court's decision?
I think the -- If my memory serves me -- and that's what I'm going on here -- I think it was a four-phase process that was recommended by the committee that Justice Montemuro chaired. And the first phase was all court administrators. And that has occurred.
I don't know what the total dollar amount is. For our jurisdiction it's around $900,000. There's 13 individuals that are on our payroll that are paid by the state. And it's for court administrators and deputy court administrators throughout the state in other jurisdictions as well. 2272 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 Phase II was to include, I believe, the judicial staff and court administrative staff. And then I think Phase III included... I don't know if it was all other staff including probation. And I don't remember if they were in Phase IV or not. And then there was a Phase IV that included the remaining employees. As part of Phase II, judicial staff, the City is getting some reimbursement from the state, in the form of about $10.7 million. That's money that is given directly to the City to support judicial staff that we have on our payroll.
So, in that respect there is money that comes from the state for that purpose. That's also a state grant in aid money that comes back for the support of probation staff. It's not a full 100 percent dollar for dollar. I believe the last formula was either 52 or 58 percent is returned in the form of dollars to the General Fund to support probation. There is, of course, state grant money that we receive for child support which fully supports the child support program. And then there are other grants that we've applied for through the state that we receive, either through P.C.C.D. or other agencies, that will support programs or initiatives.
We're still in Phase I. (Laughter.) 2274 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
They haven't officially released the money for Phase II yet.
So, the excitement that I was starting to... (Laughter.)
So, it was actually 2000 is when we went on the state payroll. That's correct.
I think we believed that last year also, and in fact suggested that in our comments.
Have we pulled together the Philadelphia... I don't think it would be inappropriate. Have we pulled together the Philadelphia delegation and expressed our need for this to be a legislative agenda?
Well, Councilman, I'll make the same offer 2275 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 that I made last year. If your staff creates a resolution, I'll work with my staff. If you pass it here in this body, I will forward it to the Chief Justice. And if you forward it to the legislative delegations, I think we can once again work together on that.
Okay. Maybe what we also could do is invite the delegation here to this chamber, and we can discuss a strategy in getting us beyond Phase I or at least call all the phases and get what we believe is most appropriate as soon as possible, because I'm sure that a lot of the programs that you would like to do, with the City's support and new state support, could be very, very helpful.
Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions? (No response.)
The budget before us has $106.5 million for the courts in the General Fund. When did the administration agree to the $108.8 million?
March 24th, Holy Thursday. I was working late.
So you must have been praying at the same time. Where is the additional $2.3 million coming from? Do you have any indication?
I 2277 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 suspect Diane Reed would have to answer that.
Yes. Is Miss Reed able to come forward to respond, please?
Just until she answers the question. You can stay, Judge.
In the agreement we have increased Class 100 for the courts by $2.271 million, and the courts have agreed to increase its revenue by $1.5 million, so that the overall impact of the increase on the General Fund is $771,755 to the General Fund above what we had budgeted.
Well, we don't have a specific place for it to come from at the 2278 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 moment, but we expect that this increase will be resolved, with all the other adjustments that need to be made to the budget when we finalize it.
The last sentence. The budget's not finalized? I thought with the document that was sent to us was the budget. And what areas of the budget are not finalized? Where are we going to get --
We're probably going to have to make a technical adjustment to the budget, to accommodate the higher number of uniformed officers for the Police Department. And there may be others, but nothing else specifically comes to mind at the moment.
That will incur spending additions? 2279 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
No. That we will -- We will adjust that by reducing the overtime budget that was discussed in Council and transferring that to Class 100 wages and benefits in the Finance Department.
The Police Department thing's pretty clear. I mean, we understand the Commissioners did say they made a mistake. They re-submitted -- He's an honorable guy, and we're going to try to work with him. But are there other areas of the budget that seem to need adjustment at some point before we pass it?
There may be, you know, several small changes that need to be made.
Yeah. I mean, close to $1 million. I know it's not exactly small, but...
All right. I 2280 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 just find it a bit disconcerting that there's anticipated changes that we don't know about.
Well, of course, we will be bringing that before Council. That will not happen in an information vacuum.
No; I understand. But I mean, I've been saying this for years. This is a board of 10 directors of this company. 11 And the C.E.O. of the company and 12 their technical staff need to be open with 13 the board. I mean, you can't just bring 14 things the last minute without having consultation with the board of directors. I think no corporation in the world does that except here. So, I mean, I guess we're going to be -- I guess we'll see when we see, but...
Well, since this is my first time, I'm assuming there's a point at which there's a discussion that occurs before the budget is finalized, and that that's going to happen before -- you know, it's not too long after the hearings. 2281 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
It's your first time, and that's a big assumption. So, thank you.
Thank you very much. Your honor, thank you so much, and thank you for all the wonderful work you do. Thank you.
Next department to testify is the Clerk of Quarter Sessions.
Good morning, Council President Verna and members of Council. My name is Vivian Miller, and I am the present Clerk of Quarter Sessions. Before I give testimony I want to thank our President Judge Massiah-Jackson and the First Judicial District for coming to our rescue, that is, the Clerk of Quarter Sessions. She said some fine words, and of 2282 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 course you know they were true. And I just want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart. I am respectfully requesting your support and understanding of the following budget request. While I am fully cognizant of the financial difficulties facing the City of Philadelphia at this time, I know that it is a certainty that we must experience cutbacks in order to make ends meet. Specifically, as it relates to our fiscal 2006 budget request, we feel that we have absorbed those cuts by requesting a total of only 118 employees to address our needs. We asked the administration for $4,388,117 for Class 100. That's 118 employees. They, in turn, offered us only $4,261,574 for approximately 111 employees. This office cannot function with this limited amount of employees. Keep in mind there are approximately five new courtrooms that will be opening, and this office will not be able to provide the 2283 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 necessary court clerks if we are forced to live with only 111 employees. In attempting to analyze these sets of numbers, the most important point that needs to be made is that the dollars appropriated for personal services never add up to the total positions requested, as submitted by our department. For example, in fiscal 2005 the department list of positions budget forms showed a total of 128 employees. However, with the administration looking to impose an overall 5 percent reduction in our budget, this number quickly became perceived to be about 121 instead. This perception has certainly turned into reality, as we struggle as a department to achieve numbers anywhere near this figure of 121. It may seem that this department continually gives money back or we don't have use for the money provided. But when you have four or five positions open, the salaries just sit in our Class 100, and then 2284 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 is returned to the City's General Fund at the end of the fiscal year. For example, it takes the Personnel Department months to allow us to interview a potential new employee. We have a laborer position open. This position has been opened since November of 2004. We submitted a request to fill this position in December of 2004. It is now April of 2005 and this position still has not been filled. If we are able to hire or replace employees who leave our department in a timely fashion, the citizens of the City will get the services they need, and that should be our main focus. In addition, we have a fines and costs unit which is responsible for the collection of all fines and costs. This money is given to the City's General Fund. This unit is currently understaffed and unable to complete the daily transactions. If we have to minimize our staff by ten more employees, we will not be able to do the following: One, count and calculate the 2285 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 funds that are paid; two, key in important costs and fines information into the computer; three, key in information that we receive from the prisons. When a prisoner has to pay their costs and fines, it is not put into the system as quickly as it should be. We are now a year behind. Therefore, the prisons continue to take money from the prisoners because their payments are not registered in the system. Sometimes the prisoners pay double the fines because this is not being done in a timely fashion. This could cause serious problems and possible lawsuits for the City. I have a list showing you how many courtrooms and how many clerks are needed, but I'm not going to read that. That's self explanatory.
So, in conclusion, I'm seeking your support for assistance so that the Clerk of Quarter Sessions can properly sustain our operation. I remain firm and fully committed to 2286 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 you that nothing short of my best efforts will always be given to achieving the goals of our City. Yet, we want to may be it abundantly clear that our department has always been and continues to be one that generates revenues each year that far exceeds the expenditures charged against us. Continually being forced to experience a reduction in staffing levels is surely going to compromise our ability to process further revenues to the desired levels. Thank you. Are there any questions?
Thank you very much. Am I correct that you're requesting an additional $126,543 for personnel services?
Ms. Miller, have you explained your requirements to the administration? 2287 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
They sent me a gentleman... What happened at the meeting, when I had... I'm sorry. Did I introduce you two guys? No. I'm sorry. For the record, I have with me Lopez Jones, my First Deputy, and Tom Christian, my budget. I was so engrossed in trying to thank the President Judge. What happened, we had a meeting with the administration. And it was agreed that they would give us the 118 employees, but the monies did not come with it. I was told that they would send us another $85,000 or so. But when my budget director looked at the monies, it only was there for the bonuses, I believe. So, Tom, if you want to...
Please identify yourself for the record. 2288 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
My name is Tom Crisman, budget officer for the Office of the Clerk of Quarter Sessions. The questions you just addressed to Mrs. Miller and whether or not we've explained our position to the administration, yes, it did take place and it was in January of this year. And at that time there was the general feeling on our part that the administration was in agreement that our request for 118, although less than what we're currently funded for in the current year, was something that we could -- could work with. However, the dollars appropriated for that 118 really didn't add up. And as a result of what we did submit on the budget, we had to use figures in two categories called delays in filling positions and turnover reduction, that in actual terms far exceed what's necessary. But they were the numbers that had to be used in order to achieve a balanced number as requested by the administration, 2289 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 but when we pointed out that we needed more money for the 118, we did get the feeling that that was going to be forthcoming and it hasn't.
Okay. I would ask Ms. Reed to please come to the witness stand. Most of the positions are civil service positions; are they not?
Which takes a great deal of time to go through a list and to interview. And is there an existing list? Are you aware?
Well, the majority of our vacancies currently deal in the Civil Service position called Court Clerk Trainee. However, due to problems that have surfaced over the last numbers of years, the list that we use, through the direction of Central Personnel, is off of the Civil Service list called Clerk III. And that's --
I'm sorry. It's called what? 2290 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
A Clerk III position is where we solicit names for the interviews against our vacancies of Court Clerk Trainees. We just have been in a situation, I guess in the current fiscal year, where most of these just have not been approved. We would take the position that if they were approved or whatever, that that causes the administration a problem going into the upcoming budget for the fiscal 2006. But we feel like it's affordable now, and we want it to be affordable then. And we thought we made ourselves very clear back in January.
Ms. Reed, you know, I just don't understand. The Clerk of Quarter Sessions budget being proposed is for $4.4 million. It brings in $8.4 million in fines and court fees and whatever. Why are you even thinking of cutting them? When --
Diane Reed, Budget Director. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to 2291 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 interrupt you.
No. As I said, what they're bringing in is almost half of what you're cutting them.
I was in attendance at a meeting in January concerning the budget of Clerk of Quarter Sessions. And it was my understanding that the clerk agreed to live with the overall budget which achieved the 5 percent reduction that we are asking everyone in the entire City to take. And they said that they felt that they could manage 118 positions with that amount of money. So, that's really their responsibility. To some degree we will have to manage through our approval of positions whether they, in fact, have more positions, because we cannot go over our budget limits. There is also a project that's going to go forward, coordinated through the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee, to provide assistance to the Clerk of Quarter 2292 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 Sessions, as well as other court-related departments that will help them improve their processes through automation which should allow them to discharge their backlog and do --
I think you heard the -- I think you heard the -- And I don't mean to interrupt you. But I think that you did hear testimony from the President Judge and her staff. And they said even -- I believe, what is his name, Mr. Cairone? He said even with automation they would not need less people. They would not need less employees. So, I just don't know what direction we're going here. And aren't we supposed to be getting five new courts? When are they supposed to come into play? Vivian.
Yes. There are -- I believe there are ten slots open. We have ten new judges. And so, I'm calculating five are replacements and five are going to be brand new. And we haven't even included that 2293 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 into the 118.
So, if you had to include the five new courts, how many more employees would you require?
Well, at least 122, at least. That would be four more.
I do believe, Vivian, that before we recess, you've got to sit with Finance and go over this, and --
-- I think we will have a callback, if need be. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. Ms. Miller, is it your contention that because of the lack of employees or the need for more employees, that your office is 2294 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 going to generate less money and could generate more money if you had the appropriate staff?
If we have the appropriate staff, it would generate more money.
Do you have the ability to determine how much more of an increase you would...
I believe at the meeting that we had in January with the administration, we stated that we had maybe over 100 boxes or so that's sitting on the floor that is nothing but monies that have to be put into the system. So, we explained all that. We don't have the personnel.
Do you have an idea what that represents in the way of numbers? You would be guessing or...
Is it safe to say that even if you added the four additional people or five additional people, that it would -- what you would earn or what 2295 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 you would raise would offset the cost of the employees?
Let me ask you a question. I mean, I've always been fascinated by this office because it's a really hard office to understand its not only jurisdiction but its relationship to the court and the City. What court jurisdiction does the Supreme Court or does the First Judicial District have over your office? Do they have any jurisdiction at all in the running of your office or in the operation of your office?
Not really. The Clerk of Quarter Sessions is an independent office. We work in conjunction with the First Judicial District, and of course the Supreme Court. They would have mandate to tell us what to do and some, you know...
Well, the direction I'm going in is that it would seem to me that when the courts have had 2296 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 difficulties in dealing with budget issues relative to the City, they simply had an order issued mandamusing the money. If there is an argument that could be made to the First Judicial District and/or the Supreme Court, that the operation of your office and the operation of the court is impaired by a reduction in staff, I mean, I could see the possibility that the Supreme Court, through the First Judicial District, may order the additional employees and require the City to simply provide them. I mean, as the Council President's stated, I mean, it seems silly that we're strapped for cash, you're sitting on 100 boxes representing cash.
And if you hire more people you'll generate more money. Seems to me to be kind of a simple answer, is that the City administration won't cooperate. Perhaps you get your relief that you need from the court because obviously if your office can't operate properly, it affects the 2297 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 overall operation of the court. And perhaps, you know, at the last -- as a last effort, perhaps you'll seek redress from the Supreme Court and the First Judicial District to get the people you need to generate the money for the City that you're obviously going to turn over once you find the revenue. So, I mean, I would argue that probably considering -- And again, I'm not an attorney. But considering your relationship with the operation of the court, it would seem to me that the Supreme Court and the First Judicial District would have some jurisdiction or say in how your office is run and managed. So, just a recommendation. Perhaps you could find the relief you need there.
If I could also add to this, we did offer temporary staffing -- temporary staffing alternatives to Clerk of Quarter Sessions. We did not get a response back.
Well, this was discussed in the meeting, and we also made a follow-up phone call.
Do you know anything about that? No, we're not aware of that.
The three witnesses at the table apparently are not concurring with what you're saying.
I'm going to suggest we're going to hear testimony from the Register of Wills, whether it be today or tomorrow. You must in touch with the Finance Department. And for the President Judge of Common Pleas Court to come in and make a plea for the Clerk of Quarter Sessions -- and it's the second year in a row, indeed -- it would certainly indicate to me and to anybody else listening to the testimony that the employees are desperately needed in the Clerk of Quarter Sessions. So, I think that this certainly should be reviewed. And the revenue that they take in is -- and they could be taking in so much more if they had more employees. They brought in $8.4 million in revenues. I think that this is being penny wise and dollar foolish. And we will never be able to man the courts the way they should be. So, before the end of the day, I am suggesting that you all get together and come 2300 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 up with some type of solution. And let us know what that solution is. Okay.
The next department. And as I said... Ms. Miller, don't leave the chamber unless you check with Ms. Reed as to when she's going to be meeting with you.
Thank you. The next department will be the Register of Wills.
Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Ronald R. Donatucci, 2301 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 the Register of Wills. To my right is my chief Deputy, Ralph Widener.
My Finance Director, Anthony DeRose, and my Administrative Services Officer, Jim Taggert.
Mr. Donatucci, we do have a copy of your testimony. It will be given to the stenographer. It will be transcribed in full. If you would be kind enough to simply summarize your testimony, we'd appreciate it.
Thank you. In our Class 100, Council President, we are basically trying to cooperate with the City. And I'm not in agreement that we should try and reduce some of our employees, but in the spirit of trying to give it an effort we are, I believe, being funded for 68 positions. We're presently at 70. As you know, we are a revenue-producing office. And listening to the prior testimony, we are in basically the 2302 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 same type of position. We make money for the City. And hopefully -- And I want to publicly thank you for the help and getting our computerization money. As you are aware, not to go on a tangent, we negotiated a settlement with the State of Pennsylvania for monies that we invested for over years. 11 When I became Register of Wills over 12 25 years ago, we had over 200 separate 13 checking accounts that were collecting no 14 interest. And over the past 25 years we've 15 been going back and forth to state, who was 16 entitled to the interest. 17 Governor Casey when he was Governor, 18 we at that time made a settlement with the 19 State of Pennsylvania. The first wave of 20 interest we approximately split which was 21 over $600,000. 22 I'm glad to announce 23 approximately... Within the last six months 24 we gave the Commonwealth and the City of 25 Philadelphia over another 220 some thousand 2303 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 which for a total in the past ten years the City was successful in getting an additional $927,000 from our office for the monies that we invested that were collecting no interest years ago. 7 But our understanding when we did 8 this -- And you know, Council President -- 9 that $222,000 was supposed to go toward a 10 computerization of our office. 11
And... But at the 13 City... Should I... But the City applied 14 that in last year's revenue for our office 15 and basically informed us that these monies 16 were not available for our computerization. 17 And with your help and with Diane's 18 help, we were successful in getting, through 19 the Productivity Bank, the monies for our 20 computerization. 21 The reason I'm mentioning all this, 22 you'll see in our Class 200, 400 and 800, 23 there's been a substantial increase in our 24 request. 25 This is predicated on the Class 200. 2304 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 This is the increase in our software. And in the Class 400, our hardware, and the Class 800, for the first time this would be our scheduled repayment for the money we're borrowing from the Productivity Bank. I am mentioning all of this... It's great to have the latest computerization, and we're going to be able to go on the internet. And we're going to be charging different groups, the Bar Association members, an access fee, a licensing fee, to come in and access our records. I'm only concerned that we're going to do all of this. I just hope I have the personnel to download and put all of this data which people will be paying, the public, the Bar, and I just hope it's not going to be a nightmare in the sense of cutting back. We're not asking for any additional employees, because over the years we've made -- when I first became Register of Wills, we had 80 full-time positions. We're now down to 70. And I'd like to mention at least in the last 10 years the 2305 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has mandated our office to implement safeguards for protecting the public in the area of status reports, inventory reports. And years ago, the Commonwealth 7 of Pennsylvania, we were not -- we were 8 always the agent for the Commonwealth but we 9 never had to supply the employees to do the 10 inheritance tax. 11 We now have our employees. The 12 state took away their employees. So, we are 13 now doing that job. We are now collecting 14 and doing the Banner program monies and 15 overseeing the Banner program with less 16 employees and with additional duties. 17 So, we're going to give it a shot, 18 Council President, and try and make do with 19 what they're trying to put in our Class 100. 20 But again, if it doesn't work, we'll 21 have to probably come back and try and ask 22 Council's help to supplement our Class 100. 23
Well, because 2306 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 there's a two percent raise for all our employees, starting...
All right. And you say you're budgeted for 68 positions?
Yes, right now, because we are in the process of trying to finish our fiscal year in the black.
It's been a very -- It's been very stressful on our staff. But I'm concerned, once this computerization is running, we have -- As you know, the history of our office goes back to the late 1600s, 2307 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 some of these records.
Okay. So, based on your testimony, you're requesting an additional $525,831 in FY'06; am I correct?
On of your budget in brief, you are projecting to generate $3,250,000 in fees, yet the administration is proposing to fund you for only $3,064,993 in FY'06. Can you tell us why they would want to budget you for less than the amount of revenues that you're bringing in?
Well, maybe Ms. Reed can. Do you mind coming up to the witness table, Ms. Reed? Maybe you can explain to us how that could be possible. 2308 Operating Budget - 4/5/05
The Register of Wills was budgeted for 67 positions for FY'05. They are currently at 69, positions and we have them budgeted for 68 positions for FY'06. When I say currently at 69, that is as of the 12/31 position run. This has to do with the necessary 5 percent reduction that all -- we're asking all departments to share in. This is not with respect to revenue.
It's not with respect to revenue. However, are not fees imposed to cover costs and not to generate revenue?
Well, they will have to be paying back their Productivity Bank loan over the next five years as well. So, there are other costs. That has to cover all of their costs not just Class 100.
But that 2309 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 is included with what the Register of Wills presented.
The amount that you have there, the $3,590,000 is their total funding, including grants revenue funding, not their General Fund.
I'm sorry. I don't quite understand what you're referring to.
The General Fund portion of the Register of Wills budget is $3,064,493. All funds budget is $3,350,413. So there are $285,920 of General Fund funding in the total budget. If you look at Page -- section 31, of the budget detail.
It doesn't make any sense. They are paying the loan back. So, are you charging them twice?
Well, according to your explanation, I think that's as I understand it.
Well, there's no detail 2310 Operating Budget - 4/5/05 attached to this, but the grants revenue, part of that is going to be the payback to the Productivity Bank.
I think there are some serious errors here. I really do. It's my understanding that this General Fund supports exactly what your revenues are taking in. I mean, it goes to the General Fund. It doesn't go to the grants fund.
The grants revenue fund is where the Productivity Bank loans are also recognized and the payback obligations.
I guess I must have said it four times. I'll say it five times. I believe they're paying it back.
It gets recognized in terms of all funds. The General Fund portion is the $3,064,000. 2311 Operating Budget - 4/5/05