After a tense process, City Council accepts Wu’s amended budget. Here’s what to know.

Local news

The deadlocked no vote and arrests in council chambers marked a dramatic budget season that ended this week.

The Boston City Council on Wednesday approved Mayor Michelle Wu’s revised budget proposal for the upcoming fiscal year, which begins next week.

The adoption of the $4.9 billion budget marks the end of a contentious budget season in which emotions often run high among council members and activists upset by the mayor’s proposed cuts.

Here are three things to know.

What did the council adopt this week?

Budget Adopted this week It reflects work by the City Council to reallocate funds to restore grant funding, with a slight modification from the mayor.

The council does not have the authority to change the total spending amount proposed by the mayor, but it can modify individual items. The council introduced an amendment package earlier this month that resulted in $11.8 million in changes to Wu’s budget. This included restoring $1.8 million for rent vouchers, $750,000 for youth jobs, $500,000 for senior programs and $100,000 for the Office of Food Justice.

Wu responded to the council’s amendments last week, accepting nearly all of the changes. The only thing she pushed back on was a proposed $1.4 million cut to the Boston Department of Transportation’s staffing line. This would have caused layoffs of employees such as parking enforcement officers, transportation planners, administrative staff and workers who install the signs, Wu said.

Instead of this reduction, Wu proposed a reduction in the services contracted with the Ministry of Transport by the same amount.

“To accommodate this reduction, the Department will seek to modify contract payment schedules, extend timelines, and adjust service levels,” Wu wrote to council members.

Councilor John Fitzgerald, who proposed the initial staffing cut, said he never intended to support something that would lead to layoffs. According to Fitzgerald, the administration told him that the Department of Transportation’s personnel budget could accommodate the cuts. Management then cited “poor judgment” and told him that changing the clause would actually result in layoffs, he said during Wednesday’s meeting.

“Our intention has always been to preserve as many jobs as possible for the workers in our city. I know we’ve had some colorful emails and phone calls in the office from certain departments in the last week or two,” he said. “I just wanted to point out the misjudgment on the part of management to put us in this position.”

In response to Fitzgerald’s comments, Marcella Durk, Wu’s press secretary, said: Boston Globe The potential impacts of the council’s amendments were outlined in a letter the administration sent to the council earlier this month.

“We provided this information in writing several weeks ago to ensure full public transparency, including that staff reductions will result in layoffs,” Durk told the newspaper. globe.

There was no formal vote on the budget on Wednesday, but the council effectively adopted the budget because no member moved to override Wu’s change.

The process was controversial

When Wu unveiled her budget proposal in April, she said the city faced a “difficult” financial situation due to inflationary pressures, rising costs and slowing revenues. In particular, the city was feeling the effects of significant police overtime pay, snow removal costs, and rapidly rising health care costs, officials said at the time.

The budget represents an increase in spending of about 2 percent, the smallest increase on an annual basis since the aftermath of the global financial crisis in fiscal year 2010. Last year, the budget grew by about 4.4 percent.

It is expected that a number of programs will be affected, including the funded program Youth employment During the school year. Wu later announced a partnership with several private organizations to secure hundreds of jobs for teenagers during the school year, but discontent remained.

Angered by the proposed cuts, a number of council members began considering outright rejection of Wu’s budget in May. One hope was that the rejection would put pressure on Wu to increase overall spending levels. Wu remained steadfast, telling council members she could not increase spending and that she would be able to resubmit the budget without any changes if it was rejected.

When it came time for a disapproval vote, the council ultimately deadlocked on a 6-6 vote between council members seen as Wu’s allies and those most critical of the mayor.

When the council met in early June to vote on the amendments package, protesters stormed the council chambers and disrupted the session for more than two hours.

They chanted in front of the council members, “You have failed us,” and raised a banner that read, “Save the jobs of our youth, and the city’s money now, not empty promises of private jobs and mythical funding.” Eight people were arrested before the council could resume its work.

Frustrations remain

And with the financial headwinds facing the city likely to abate in the near future, there could be more difficult decisions ahead. This year’s budget process has exposed tensions between administration and council that are unlikely to go away either.

Councilman Minyard Culpepper continued to criticize Wu’s budget proposal on Wednesday. He credited activists, including the protesters who were arrested, for helping move the city in the right direction.

“This budget brings back cuts, maybe not to the level I would have liked to see, but it brings back cuts that should not have been cut in the first place. The programs and grants that were put on the chopping block were not luxuries or add-ons, they were investments that served some of Boston’s most vulnerable populations,” Culpepper said.

Councilor Julia Mejia also praised activists for pressuring council members and administration throughout the process. She called the budget process “broken” and said council members should have been more willing to reject Wu’s budget.

Mejia urged her colleagues to put more pressure on the administration in the future.

“That’s the job of the Boston City Council, to stand up and fight for your constituents no matter who you’re fighting against,” she said. “I believe we have lost that battle in this room, and I will ask us to find our ability to stand up and speak out, because that is what we were appointed to do.”