Research Library – Citizen Watchdog

Four – City Manager FYI Memos re: FY27 Budget Q&As

October 3, 2026/in Research Library

AI Assisted Comparison of the March 2023 Deferred Maintenance List and Cincy on Track

August 19, 2026/in Blog, Research Library

Deferred maintenance List March 2023

Cincy on Track Proposed Spending Plan

Cincy_on_Track_Crosswalk_Analysis

After the Eastside neighborhoods experienced such serious flooding earlier this summer, I was surprised to find that Cincy on Track, the city’s infrastructure spending plan for the railroad money, does not include any projects for sewers, water or stormwater management. Notwithstanding any explanation, that was a surprising finding.

That revelation got me wondering what other deferred maintenance may have been left out of Cincy on Track. I first wanted to check the city’s list of deferred maintenance. I asked AI to do a crosswalk analysis of two documents:

1) a deferred maintenance list issued by the city administration in March 2023, pursuant to a request from the city council which totals appx.$250 million; and

2) the Cincy on Track Plan, which also totals appx $250 million.

I wanted the analysis to determine the extent to which the Cincy on Track Plan included items on the deferred maintenance list. The results are interesting.

I have not yet checked the analysis for accuracy but at first glance I did see that the $40 million upgrade of the Fleet Maintenance Garage is not in Cincy on Track according to the analysis, but the city and the media have reported that the upgrade is in process. Maybe the city is not using railroad money for the project? We will try to resolve any of those types of discrepancies we find in the analysis.

The entire analysis and source documents have been posted above. Feel free to try your own AI analysis or check for errors or omissions.

There is a lot more work necessary to enable the public to see exactly how the rairoad money is being accounted for and exactly it is being used for being used for – not just the plan.

Last I checked, probably somewhere between $50 million and $80 million is being comingled in the city’s investment account. There needs to be accounting rules in place to ensure compliance with the state law but the city is not cooperating. We want the proceeds from the Trust Fund to be treated like all the other restricted funds but apparently the city wants as few strings attached to the railroad money as possible.

FY27 Council Member Funding Priorities (6.8.26)

June 8, 2026/in Research Library

Communication Albi 202601974

Communication Cramerding 202601968

Communication James 202601979

Communication Jeffreys 20261970

Communication Johnson 202601973

Communication Kearney 202601971

Attachment A Kearney 202601971

Attachment B Kearney 202601971

Communication _002 Nolan

Communication Owens 202601978

Communication Walsh 202601969

“The City Manager’s Recommended FY 27 Budget” Presentation (6.1.26)

May 30, 2026/in Research Library

Presentation budget hearing 6.1.26

Cincy on Track – Project Update (5.19.26)

May 20, 2026/in Research Library

Rail_Board_COT_May 2026 Final 5.19.26

On May 19, 2026, the city’s Department of Public Services briefed the Board of the Railway Trust on “Cincy on Track, which as you may know, is the city’s name of their plan for spending the railway money.

The presentation was titled “Cincy on Track: Project Update and Fund Deployment Report.

It includes 19 slides, mostly providing pictures and summaries of select projects, with financial information presented towards the end of the presentation along with information about how the city plams to fix its process problems. .

I have posted the entire presentation in my Research Library here.

I am not sure whether the Board or the city will post the presentation as well.

The video of the meeting on May 19th has not been posted yet, as of the close of business on May 20^th.

If you’re not familiar you can watch videos of the Board meetings on the media page of the CSR Trust website at: https://thecsrt.org/public-info/#media

FY 2027 Cincinnati Budget Presentations as of 4.06.26

April 6, 2026/in Research Library

FY 27 Budget Update Presentation 3.16.26

FY 27 Presentation Budget Basics

FY 27 City Manager’s Strategic Priorities Overview 3.16.26

FY 27 Department of Transportation and Engineering’s 3.18.26

FY 27 Department of Finance Budget Presentation 3.18.26

FY 27 Department of Buildings and Inspections’ (B&I) 3.19.26

FY 27 Citizen Complaint Authority’s (CCA) Budget 3.18.26

FY27 Emergency Communications Center (ECC) 3.16.26

City of Cincinnati Competitive Grant Programs

City of Cincinnati CDBG Programs

FY 27 Cincinnati Police Deprtment 3.30.26

FY 27 Dept. of Human Services 3.30.26

FY 27 Enterprise Technology Solutions 3.30.26

FY 27 Health Department 3.30.26

FY 27 GCWW SMU Budget Presentation

FY 27 MSD Budget Presentation

FY 27 Law Department Budget Presentation

FY 27 Cincinnati Fire Department Budget Presentation

FY27 Capital Planning, Debt Capacity abd Debt Affordability

FY27 City Council Members’ Budget Priority Memos

April 5, 2026/in Research Library

The agenda for the meeting of the Budget, Finance and Governance Committee on April 6, 2026 contains a memo from each member of council concerning their FY 27 Budget priorities. The Committee Chairman, Councilmember Cramerding, did not submit a memo. The members’ priority memos are posted below.

I have a quick story about “earmarks.” When I was going through my confirmation process to serve as the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Commerce, earmarks were a hot issue on Capitol Hill. Recall the “Bridge to Nowhere.” One of the hurdles along the way of my confirmation was an interview with very seasoned staff of the Senate Commerce Committee. The first question out of the box was, “What are your views on earmarks?” I responded, “I think there are good earmarks and some not so good earmarks.” They said, “Good Answer.” The rest of the interview was a breeze. That is still my answer.

However, Cincinnati’s process, seriously lacks transparaency around most, if not all, of the nearly $35 million in earmarks in the priority memos. Where do the numbers come from? How is the public supposed to tell a good earmark from a not-so-good earmark?

FY27 budget priorities Albi

FY27 budget priorities James

FY27 budget priorities Jeffreys

FY27 budget priorities Johnson

FY27 budget priorities Kearney

FY27 budget priorities Nolan

FY27 budget priorities Owens

FY27 budget priorities Walsh

earmarks_table_Final 4.5.26

Cincinnati City Manager Annual Performance Review (3.9.26)

March 9, 2026/in Research Library

The city council’s evaluation of the city manager’s performance was added to the agenda 30 minutes before today’s (3.9.26) meeting of the Budget, Finance and Governance Committee.

The following related documents have been posted below.

The city council’s process (1.20.26)
The city manager’s 34-page power point presentation about her performance – essentially her self-assessment. ( 12.9.25)
The city council’s 11-page review memo (Undated, presented at budget committee meeting on 3.9.26).

One thing noticeably missing. A key part of performance managment is communicating performance expectations at the outset of the performance period. For example, what performance metrics will be used to actually measure the city manager’s individual performance? If that happened here, I have not found where it was documented.

As it is, let’s just say, the city council members are not tough graders.

city manager review process

Presentation city manager performance

City Council performance evaluation of the city manager 3.9.26