Houston Politics

Blogging City Hall and Harris County government with the Chronicle staff

Your guide to the “MFOR”


The unveiling tomorrow of the city’s “Monthly Financial and Operations Report” — or MFOR (pronounced “MO-far” and/or “MO-fer”) as city insiders call it –is likely to reignite many of the same tensions it has in the past several months over the city’s budget.

In several instances, City Controller Annise Parker has questioned the projections and assumptions of Mayor Bill White in her monthly budget presentation, drawing rebukes from her opponents in the mayor’s race for having “different numbers” than the city finance department.

So, point by painstaking point, here is an annotated explanation of this chart showing exactly how Parker’s numbers differ from those of Finance Director Michelle Mitchell and on what remains to be cut. You can see this in a chart here.

1. The first line in Parker’s letter says there is a “$106.4 million shortfall.” Sounds pretty bad, right? But if you read on past some of the discrepancies, it actually says there is only “a $3.3 million gap still to be closed.” That sounds like a lot less of a problem than $106.4 million, but the controller’s office has said they continue to express the budget situation that way to emphasize the degree to which expenses exceed revenues.

2. The $106.4 million includes $50.7 million from the city’s “fund balance,” budget guru-speak for surplus funds, that the administration planned on reducing as a part of its budget. Mayor Bill White has frequently chafed at the notion that he should not use these funds, saying he intentionally built them up during his tenure in order to use for a rainy day (i.e. now).

3. Of the remaining $55.7 million, $14.7 million comes from differences in projected revenues between the controller’s office and finance department. The biggest distinction here is a $7.3 million tax payment made by chemical giant LyondellBasell that the city received in the 2009 fiscal year. The finance department has counted this payment in the 2010 fiscal year and the controller in the 2009 fiscal year. Neither dispute that the money is there, but it makes the projections different every time. The remaining $7 million comes from different estimates of how much the city will collect sales tax, permits and municipal court fees and fines, among other things.

4. Of the remaining $41 million, the city is estimating it will reap $15.7 million in “fund transfers.” This is basically scrubbing the budget for balances in various pools that have been dedicated to pay for specific issues or areas. Parker has compared it to scouring couch cushions for change (wish I could do that and come up with $15.7 million!). Her office does not count these transfers because they have yet to be approved by City Council.

5. Of the remaining $25.3 million, $14.7 will come from the city’s efforts to sell off assets it determines it no longer needs. These largely real estate sales also have yet to be approved by City Council, which is why the controller will not recognize them. While land sales do not always seem controversial, they can become neighborhood issues if the sale raises concerns about what would take the place of a city facility or space. Several council members said they can already see some major fights brewing over these sales.

6. Of the remaining $10.6 million, $7.3 million again comes from how the two parties account differently for that LyondellBasell payment.

7. That leaves $3.3 million left to cut or otherwise reposition, which while not being insignificant, does not appear to be an insurmountable barrier.

City Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck, who chairs the council’s Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (and has the benefit of not being in the middle of an election right now), said she feels reasonably assured, after hours and hours of meetings with the mayor and various city department directors, that the finance department’s assumptions and projections will be realized.

Any remaining gaps are likely to be finally closed in the spring, city officials said, when the council passes an “appropriations ordinance” that closes any remaining budget gaps. This is really the only point at which the city controller has power of the budget, because she (or he in the case of Parker’s eventual replacement) has the ability to order up more cuts if the budget does not ultimately balance.

So there you have it, the city’s budget situation in a nutshell, albeit a fairly dense one. Look for more detailed explanations on this from the Chronicle in the coming days.

Categories: Uncategorized
Bradley Olson

One Response

  1. sherffius is my homeboy says:

    Well done Brad.