The bottom line for Kyle homeowners

A number of individuals, myself included, will claim "fee" is just another word for "tax." So with that in mind, I tried to devise a simple way of determining whether the average homeowner comes out ahead or behind under the city manager’s proposed budget for FY 2016-17.

According to this, the median price for a home in Kyle is $142,100. Using that figure, then, the owner of a median priced home in Kyle will save $14.21 in property taxes because of the city manager’s proposed 1-cent decrease.. Stormwater fees will come to $36 per year and the increased garbage collection fees will amount to $9.96 more per year. So overall, someone living in a home valued at $142,100 will owe the City of Kyle $31.75 more than that same person had to pay this fiscal year. To come out even on the deal would require a property owner with a home valuation of at least $460,000.

That, to me, is the bottom line.

This is one more example of why I am such a proponent of budgeting for outcomes. How you feel about this bottom line is directly related to how you evaluate the city services you are receiving and I don't think a "ledger-ized" city budget reveals with any clarity those city services.

For example, instead of just saying the city will spend $75,000 from HOT funds for "City Beautification," I would like the city budget to say by the end of the fiscal year it will create a community garden, install gateway signage on I-35 and whatever else the city hopes to accomplish under the heading of city beautification and then under each of those accomplishments tell me what it's going to cost to make those results happen.

Instead of saying it is spending x, y and z on street maintenance, I would like to see the city plans to upgrade x number of lane miles by resurfacing these particular streets and then tell me what all the costs, in personnel and equipment, required in accomplishing that task.

That not only provides clarity, but it also provides a report card citizens (as well as council members) can use to more accurately grade the performance of the staff, i.e., did staff accomplish the task it said it would -- did it provide the services promised to its citizens it promised -- when the money was approved for this task.

Now switching to budgeting for outcomes doesn't come as easily as flipping a light switch. The first thing that has to happen is that the city council must establish its priorities for the city -- the areas it believes the city should key in on. The five most common key focus areas I've seen cities create are (1) public safety, (2) economic vibrancy, (3) a clean, healthy environment, (4) culture, arts, recreation and education, and (5) efficient, effective and economic government. I can't conceive of anything that Kyle city government would need to spend money on that couldn't be listed under one of those five topics.

Then, instead of simply listing budget items by departments (although such a listing could be provided as a budget appendix) each desired outcome is listed under one of the key focus areas; i.e., each outcome (budget item) must relate to a priority created by the council.

That creates a budget that's working to achieve something instead of a budget that's just working.