Councilor Sam Yoon Needs Your Help

Councilor Yoon has sent out this fact sheet

Supporting Youth and Preventing Violence:
Voting NO on Wednesday, June 28

THE VOTES

There will be three separate votes taken on the FY07 budget on Wednesday, June 28, at 11:30 AM.

• One will be on the capital budget (which is actually a series of votes on about twelve or so “loan orders”). Nine YES votes are required to pass each loan order.

• Another will be on the BPS operating budget (also known as the “Annual Appropriation for the School Department.”) Seven YES votes are required to pass this budget.

• The budget we are focused on will be the non-school, or city operating budget (also known as the “Annual Appropriation Tax Order.”) Seven YES votes are required to pass this budget.

There are thirteen city councilors; however, Councilor Kelly will likely be absent on June 28 due to his illness. Therefore, six NO votes will leave only six possible YES votes. In other words, six NO votes are required to prevent the operating budget to pass.

If the operating budget does not pass, the city will operate under the FY06 budget on a month-to-month basis until a revised operating budget is submitted and seven YES votes can be achieved.

Currently, Felix Arroyo, Chuck Turner, Charles Yancey, and Sam Yoon are committed to voting NO on the city operating budget, unless the following two conditions are met.

FUNDING FOR OUR YOUTH

The two budget areas requiring significant increases are for (1) summer jobs and growth opportunities for youth, and (2) violence prevention and intervention in the lives of at-risk youth. Below are the details regarding how these increases would take place.*

1. The Youth Fund budget (Appropriation No. 448, under the Human Services Department) stands at $3.8 million. The bulk of budget is for summer jobs and administrative overhead. This budget needs to be increased to $5 million, in order to fill the great unmet need for summer jobs.

2. The Boston Centers for Youth & Families budget (Appropriation No. 385, also under Human Services Department) funds streetworkers, youth workers, advocates, and other personnel who work in youth development at a cost of $2.1 million. The personnel portion of this budget needs to be increased to $5 million.

This funding should allow for the hiring of contract employees or the creation of grant programs to fulfill short-term needs for youth services and violence prevention. This funding program would be designed with community-based organizations.

The proposed FY07 city operating budget is $962 million. We are requesting an increase of $4.1 million, an increase of 0.4%.

The city’s cash reserves—a cash fund set aside for one-time emergency measures or budget shortfalls—stands at $56 million. Currently, $8 million in cash reserves has been set aside for FY07. Using another $4 million would leave the cash reserves balance at $44 million, which is 4.5% of the current operating budget.

THE RATIONALE

The measures that we as a city have been taking thus far to stem the rising tide of violence have been welcome but modest. The summer months are upon us, and we need to act boldly if we are to have a real impact on the city’s streets and neighborhoods.

A larger police force will increase the city’s overall level of public safety. However, we are calling for a much greater funding commitment to our youth, and to those who work with youth who at risk of engaging in dangerous behavior. It is these children and their social networks who lie at the heart of the problem. They need and demand our love and support.

We believe and predict that this increased funding will result in a noticeable decrease in the homicide rate and other indicators of violence and unhealthy behavior among our youth within the coming year.

CHALLENGES AND REBUTTALS

In anticipation of some “pushback” from those who will question the wisdom of this budget investment, here are some potential challenges and suggested rebuttals:

1. Spending this much money puts the city's fiscal future at risk. There are large union contracts to be negotiated, and we don't know how onerous they will be on the city's budget.

Collective bargaining affects almost 85% of the city's budget, since 85% of the city's budget goes toward personnel. Therefore, upcoming contract negotiations can always be used as a built-in excuse for not spending money now.

A $4 million increase represents only 0.4% of the city's operating budget. Furthermore, a $4 million increase in spending cash reserves of $56 million does not seem, on its face, an exorbitant amount to spend.

We all need to recognize that the city's financial resources exist to serve us, to improve the quality of life in our city. Strong financial management is a means to an end and not an end in itself.

2. The problem with summer jobs is not money; it is the lack of employers who are willing to create the jobs. In general, just throw money at this problem won’t solve it.

To be sure, money by itself does not solve problems. It also requires quality leadership and good strategic planning to use money effectively.

If there is truly a lack of employers with summer jobs, then there should be no harm in setting the money aside, given that the funds may not be spent. In fact, unused funds could be re-appropriated by a certain date. In addition, some of the funds could be used to do strategic planning around youth employment so that future resources will be spent wisely.

The fact is, leadership and planning are essential ingredients to solving any problem, but they do not have hard deadlines in the same way that the city’s resources do. Appropriating the increased resources will in fact force us as a city to get serious about planning and about raising leadership, both for summer youth employment and for youth violence prevention.

3. The state has already awarded the city a $3 million “gang prevention” grant. Why isn’t this enough?

The Shannon Gang Grant goes mainly to fund Youth Opportunity Boston, and the Boston Re-entry Initiative, both of which focus on case management of court-involved and incarcerated youth. To be sure, these are worthy programs; however, they do not focus on those youth who are at-risk of becoming court-involved, or who are already lost “outside the system.”

The increased funding we are seeking for street workers and youth outreach workers is intended to prevent gang warfare, to resolve conflict, and to plug in youth living on the street into established programs. Increased funding for summer jobs simply ensures that every youth who wants to be productive and to stay off the street this summer is given that opportunity.

* For both areas, the line items that should see most of the increases are:

51000 Permanent Employees - for more city-employed streetworkers and youth workers

52900 Contracted Services - for short-term contracted youth workers

56200 Special Appropriation - for summer jobs and special grants to community-based organizations; also for participatory strategic planning

Jennifer in Boston