Houston City Controller Annise Parker Fans Shortfall Flames

September 6th, 2009 · No Comments

As politicians have shown us time and time again, the easiest way to win votes is to prey on people’s fears: sound an alarm, then present yourself as the only one who can put out the fire. If a candidate chooses to use this tactic, however, they should take care to present the facts in a responsible, ethical manner. Fanning flames and blowing smoke to make a problem seem much larger than it truly is does nothing to serve the public. It distorts the truth.

Houston City Controller Annise Parker, in her bid to become mayor, appears to be doing just this with her pronouncement that Houston faces an enormous budget shortfall for FY2010. Houston Mayor Bill White, “told reporters that Parker is wrong to say the city has a $103 million shortfall. The Mayor says his estimate is closer to $25 Million” (video: http://www.click2houston.com). So why is Parker’s report so drastically higher?

As Houston City Council Member Mike Sullivan said, “Let’s not have the controller throw out one set of numbers and the administration throw out another set of numbers and have city council trying to figure out what’s right. That’s unfair to the taxpayers.” The reason for the shortfall variance lies in just that: inconsistent reporting methods. While the Mayor’s office continues to use the same set of numbers in its reports; the Controller’s office has changed how it calculates its budget projections. Controller Parker’s reports to City Council reveal her own inconsistency.

It starts with the fund balance. In her previous reports, Controller Parker did not include the fund balance in her General Fund projections. (Evidence: FY09-January09 Report | FY09-February09 Report | FY09-March09 Report | FY09-April09 Report | FY09-May09 Report | FY09-June09 Report | 2008-2004 Reports at http://www.houstontx.gov/budget/)

As election season has ramped up, however, Controller Parker suddenly decided to start including the fund balance draw down in her budget projections. After five years of reporting that each month’s budget projection “does not reflect” or “anticipated” the fund balance, Parker decided to inflate her FY10 shortfall projection by padding it with the fund balance draw down. (Evidence: FY10-July09 Report) By inflating the FY10 shortfall with the fund balance, Parker makes the situation seem more dire. To add fuel to the fire, Parker also changed her rhetoric. Before, she said that not including the fund balance is responsible for why she projects such a large shortfall (FY09-March09 Report). Now, Parker has turned around and projected a large shortfall based on including it.

Why is Controller Parker changing how she reports budget projections? Why is she now adding the fund balance draw down to her FY10 projections, when she didn’t do so for the previous five years? Why the inconsistency? Is it an attempt to light a fire under her mayoral campaign? More importantly, is it ethical and responsible to the city and its taxpayers?

Parker claims that FY10 is different from Fy09. That’s obvious. But that’s not the issue at hand. The years may be different, the economies may be different; but the methods of accounting and reporting should remain consistent. If the Controller reports a shortfall based on A+B-C on one day, then bases it on A+B+C the next, she places city government at the risk of making bad decisions on important policies based on incompatible numbers. This is not sound accounting practice from the CFO of our city.

To inflate the numbers is misleading. It’s incendiary. It erodes trust in city government. The city and its taxpayers deserve better than this type of behavior from their elected officials. They deserve honest, consistent reporting that they can truly trust. Annise Parker’s clearly isn’t it.