Let’s talk about talking about budgets, Part I

Job 1 is to get people's attention. It's OK to let your freak flag fly in doing so.

The least sexy but most important issue local governments deal with every year is the proposed budget. Getting quality public input on the budget and tax rate is hard. Heck, getting basic understanding of the budget and tax rate is hard.

Most folks just can’t wrap their heads around the numbers and that’s not because they’re stupid. It’s because they are human beings. At a budget webinar last year a GFOA rep shared research that shows people are great at understanding numbers, as long as the numbers don’t add up to more than five. Any number higher than that is understood as “lots.” 

Still, try we must to engage the public on the budget because of one absolute truth: Budgets are the clearest expression of an elected body’s priorities. Simply put, what’s important is what gets funded.

That’s good news, because you should be talking about strategic priorities, i.e., what’s important, when you’re talking about spending decisions. A Good Government Truism is that folks need to know you’re not just making this stuff up as you go along. You’re actually making decisions according to long-range plans that look at community needs (and wants) that are in line with what folks are willing to pay in taxes and fees.

Step 1 is to get folks to pay attention to the budget. This. Is. Hard. And this is where you should let your communicators get creative. Have some fun. Or even get downright weird.

One of the most creative budget storytelling efforts I’ve ever seen comes from my friends at the City of Arlington, Texas. Take a quick four minutes to watch.

This video got great local and national recognition for Arlington and has more than 1 million views on YouTube. And the city didn’t have to spend a sizable chunk of its budget to pay for all those Lego creations. Communications chief Jay Warren simply leveraged his massive Lego obsession, er, collection to the City’s benefit. The City’s crack staff of videographers handled the stop motion animation in less time than you would think, according to Jay. The result is a video you can’t stop watching and is really informative.

The video hits some themes I think are critical to any budget messaging:

1. It begins with a list of strategic priorities, which provides context for spending decisions.

2. It’s up front about a water rate increase while noting the rates are still among the lowest in the region. Honest and smart. I love it.

3. There’s lots of focus on basic services – streets, utilities, public safety, parks and the library. These services are why we have governments IMHO. It’s not to fight the culture wars! (That’s a rant for another day.)

4. New spending programs are identified, along with the dollars required to fund them. It ain’t cheap running a growing municipality, and Arlington spells it out clearly.

5. It closes out with a smart connection to the city’s tagline, the American Dream City.

I do have one serious nit to pick, which I’ll get to shortly.

Here’s one from my former colleagues in Round Rock, Texas, featuring a fiscal expert who just happens to love all things pink and sparkly (and a guy named Ken). This one is just plain fun.

Actually, it’s just plain genius having Barbie explain the Texas two-step of property tax rate setting at the beginning of this video. The City has nothing to do with establishing property values, the first step. Communications Director Sara Bustilloz told me it was a Council priority for budget messaging to include that fact, so she put it front and center.

Other highlights from this video:

1. A reminder that public safety makes up half of the General Fund budget. Defund the Police is NOT a thing in Round Rock.

2. A focus on the BIG spending required for major road projects. Traffic is the No. 1 problem cited by Round Rockers in City surveys. Just like in Arlington, keeping up with a growing City is EXPENSIVE.

3. A clear statement (including helpful graphics!) that property taxes make up only 13 percent of general fund revenues in Round Rock. In other words, the budget isn’t being balanced on the backs of homeowners. The City spells it out clearly (with numbers no bigger than five!) this way: For every $1 in property taxes, the city uses $4.16 from other sources to fund general operations.

4. That said, the video plainly states that many folks will be paying more in property taxes even though the tax rate is going down, and then explains what that increase will be paying for.

That last point is key. (Warning: You’ve reached today’s rant.) In growing communities in Texas, where there is significant economic activity and thus significant increases in appraised property valuations, it’s easy to get away with just saying your tax rate is going down. Too many cities don’t go on to explain that while the tax rate is going down, actual tax payments are going up due to those increased valuations. (If you don’t understand, go back and watch Barbie explain why beginning at the :30 second mark in the video. I told you she’s a financial whiz.)

My guess is that when cities emphasize only that the tax rate is going down, what citizens hear is that their tax payments are going down. And then when they get their tax bills later in the year and see they are paying more, I’m guessing they wonder who the heck lied to them.

Folks, it’s a Good Government Truism that we live and die on our credibility with citizens. There’s no need to hide the fact that folks will be paying more in property taxes, if that is indeed the case. What’s needed is a rational explanation for why they’re paying more. In Round Rock, the increase last year was $5 a month. Did people complain about it on Facebook and Nextdoor? Of course! No one likes paying more in taxes. Hell, I don’t like paying more in taxes. But what I really don’t like is being misled by my government. We see it all the time at the state and national level, and it makes me want to puke. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott tweeted the other day he has a plan to eliminate property taxes. He left out how he intends to make up for the $73 billion a year in lost revenue that would result. It’s pathetic. We’re better than that in local government.

OK. Rant over.

Now for the weird.

Just like the folks in Arlington used supplies on hand to create their amazing message, we did the same in Round Rock eight years ago when Ron Pitchman made his obnoxious debut. In our case, the material on hand was a fake mustache and cheesy sports jacket coupled with the creative genius of Brian Ligon, our then multi-media specialist extraordinaire now working his magic for the City of Mont Belvieu just outside of Houston.

What’s to like about Round Rock’s AMAZING Value!?

1. It’s up front about the tax increase, and details what folks are getting for that extra $5 a month. (Yes, this is a dead horse I’ll be beating on. Get used to it.)

2. It’s short. You get one minute of wacky infomercial, followed by another minute of calm, cool and collected. A 2:11 run time is super short when it comes to covering something as wide ranging as a city budget. But, as astute readers will recall, the first goal of budget engagement is to get people’s attention. Mission accomplished.

3. For all those number crunchers who do want to wade into the details, there’s a call to action at the end to go to an easy-to-remember website address (www.roundrocktexas.gov/budget) with links to the actual budget document, briefing materials, a tax rate calculator and more.

Of course, not every City Council or City Manager is going to be on board with this kind of out-of-the-box thinking when it comes to budget communications. I get it. (To tell the truth, I thought I might get fired for the Ron Pitchman infomercial.) But I challenge you to show me a truly engaging budget video that isn’t a little bit off the wall. Know of one? Great – share a link in the comments below!

Once you’ve got folks attention, then what? That’s another post for another day. Next Friday, to be specific. In that post, we’ll do a deep dive into a budget engagement process that began with a potential political firestorm started by – who else? – the firefighters union.