Bell made it clear that he supported the budget. He thanked staff, said he thought the budget looked great, and said he looked forward to doing it again next year. That was about as far as his public explanation went.⁣
⁣
For a vote this large, more insight should be expected. Residents had raised questions about reserves, the amount above revenue neutrality, staffing growth, and rising tax bills. Bell did not really engage with those issues during the hearing. He did not explain what he had questioned, what he had concerns about, or what convinced him the city had landed in the right place.⁣
⁣
The public heard the conclusion, but not much of the thought process behind it.⁣
⁣
That is why his score dropped considerably. A councilmember does not need to ask questions just for the sake of asking them, but one of the biggest financial votes of the year should come with some explanation. If Bell believed the reserve level was appropriate, why? If he thought the extra $1.1 million above revenue neutrality was justified, what made the case for him? If he believed there was no realistic way to trim spending further, what had he seen that led him there?⁣
⁣
Bell supported the budget. That part was clear. The reasoning behind that support was not.⁣
⁣
𝐓𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐥: 𝟏𝟏/𝟓𝟎 𝐅⁣
⁣