City property owners will be paying four additional mills of property tax this year and, for the most part, those taxpayers have accepted the necessity for that higher tax bill. The additional revenue will help the city accomplish some badly needed street-repair work — street repairs that, in some cases, have been needed, but have remained undone, for decades.

What most property owners probably didn't expect was that, 19 days into the new year and 2010 budget, they would learn that the 41.5 mills of property tax they will be paying might not be nearly enough to meet the city's overall money needs.

Former city clerk Bob Brehm, though no longer employed by the city but still concerned about its future, made a financial presentation to the council Tuesday evening that projects trouble ahead. In fact, his presentation recommended that the city file for distressed status under state Act 47, the Municipal Financial Recovery Act, which would provide opportunities for the city to beef up its financial standing — but which could have negative ramifications for city taxpayers greater than what the new budget via the four additional mills contains.

After learning about Brehm's presentation, taxpayers probably are wondering what the best options might be for helping the city avert a future crisis — without the distressed-status approach. That is a good question, but so is the question of why the city hasn't been emphasizing its impending plight over the past year or so.

Many residents probably believed that the new Local Services Tax, also having been known as the Emergency and Municipal Services Tax, had enabled the city to overcome the serious financial issues with which it was struggling prior to the tax being enacted several years ago by the state General Assembly. The city, which is operating with a $7.34 million spending plan for this year, collected $231,356 by way of the tax in 2008 and $271,483 in 2009. The 2010 budget estimates Local Services Tax revenue of $280,000 — an amount in line with last year, but an amount that won't make a huge dent in the city's financial challenges.

On Wednesday, Mayor Maggie Stock said Brehm's assessment of the city's finances is accurate, but she didn't offer why she hasn't stepped to the forefront to present the problem to the taxpayers.

For city residents, it's important to understand that, unlike the federal government, the city is not permitted to enact a deficit budget — one that doesn't have revenues to match projected spending.

So, if Brehm's troubling prediction is indeed in danger of coming true, city leaders need to begin serious, open discussions about all facets of the city's financial picture.

It can be rightly questioned why extensive, open discussion and evaluation of the financial difficulties haven't yet begun at council meet- ings.

For some people attending council sessions, such extensive discussion might be boring, but city residents have a right to be apprised of the full extent of the city's money problems — if not in person then through the press.

The people of Butler also have the right to be told the main contributing factors to the dilemma.

In addition to extensive discussion of the financial troubles, protracted talks on the pros and cons of distressed status are necessary, because although such status has the potential to provide additional revenue, it also opens a window for city residents to be taxed more than what is called for under the new budget.

When discussing the financial difficulties, city leaders must not be reluctant to discuss how much provisions of current labor contracts are making it difficult to make ends meet.

For example, how much should city employees be contributing toward their health care coverage and how much are they actually contributing?

If distressed status is on the minds of some of the city leaders currently in office, they no doubt understand the stigma associated with such a filing. How would potential new enterprises view the city under such a circumstance? Would the proposed Centre City Project be jeopardized?

The financial challenge facing the city is daunting and complex. The public should ask to see the annual report that the city will be filing with the state between now and March 15.

Meanwhile, Brehm, as one who knows the workings of the city government, should keep in touch with financial developments and not hesitate to express future opinions.

If city leaders opt for the wrong steps in dealing with the financial challenges, this year's four mills might be regarded as the good old days.