Introduction
The budget for the City of Philadelphia was prepared by the Philadelphia city council department managers and other stakeholders. This budget can be used to evaluate performance when the budgeted level of activity is the same as the actual results. This analytical treatise will present a budget line for funding the renovation of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park, which is of interest to the local environmental groups and the area residents of the city of Philadelphia. The stakeholders are families around Philadelphia and beyond since the park is one of the most common recreational sites in this region. The findings of the analysis are based on the interview with the Philadelphia City clerk, Mr. John Claude.
Expenditure request and funding level
The Philadelphia budget council approved a budget of $100,000 to renovate the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park. The request for the budget allocation was made by the local environmental lobby group called the Philadelphia Green Movement. In the last five years, the funding for renovation of the park has been to the tune of $56, 780 with the highest allocation being in the year 2011 at $32,000. In the year 2013, the annual budgetary allocation for general maintenance of the park was $8,000. The current renovation project is aimed at providing public goods such as better pathways, environmental conservation, and drainage within the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park.
Political interests and intension
Being a public institution budget, it is apparent that it has a political language especially in addressing the core social pillars of the City such as environmental conservation, provision of public good (pathways expansion), and macro management of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park’s sewage and water systems. Besides, the voters fall in the first pyramid in the hierarchy of command chain. Reflectively, the macro social issues are given the first priority in the allocation of resources and funding.
The renovation project at the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park was championed by the local Philadelphia Green Movement alongside the council representative for the Philadelphia region. The non governmental agency and the council representative office managed to convince the budgeting team through collecting ten thousand signatures from the local residents. Since the Philadelphia region is predominantly associated with conservative society, the support was immense from the older generations.
Expenditure benefits
The budget message captures the three main elements of a complete budget. As a matter of fact, there are long-term, short-term, and midterm goals that are allocated resources according to their agency and costs of implementation. Besides, the budget statement has a clear policy for reviewing performance and raising revenues to fund its development goals. In addition, the budget factors in the demands of the city in terms of infrastructure and possible means of financing their expansion.
The main programs that are prioritized in the budget are completion of the public works relocation facility, completion of the widening project, environmental project completion, and upgrading water/sewage management system within the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park. Through this expenditure, the municipality’s collective profile will be improved as the municipality interested in conservation efforts.
Besides, the municipality will benefit from increased park entry fee collection since the demand will improve upon completion of the renovation exercise. As a result, the municipality will have higher comparative advantage as the government agency interested in serving the interests of the local community through sustainable development and preservation of symbolic facilities such as the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park. All the residents of the Philadelphia City are beneficiaries of the project. In addition, the local lobby and environmental groups are assured of the sustainability of the park through the renovation exercise.
Obstacles
Basically, an externality in the field of environmental conservation and sustainability refers to any benefit or cost which happens due to an action or activity. It directly affects a third party who may not be involved and has not made the choice to accept the benefit or cost. Reflectively, an externality is a secondary result of a primary action and may bring with it a benefits or a cost. There are two types of externalities, that is, positive and negative externality. Negative externalities are accompanied by costs incurred while positive externalities are characterized by strings of benefits. An ideal example of a negative externality in the park project is the continuous uncontrolled pollution activities that directly causes air from the sewage wastes. As a result of the pollution, the whole community has to incur the cost of poor health and clean up to restore the clean environment.
Conclusion
Conclusively, the main issues identified in this budget are the focus on the difference between the actual and budgeted amounts. It analyzes the total variance between standard and actual result in apportioning funds for different priorities in the renovation of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park. Being a public institution, the budget is characterized by a strong political language. Besides, the Philadelphia municipality is likely to benefit from a comparative advantage as a government agency with a sustainable environmental management policy.