| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Fedup
Member
86 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2008 : 9:09:44 PM
|
Yes, Massdee, it is very confusing in some areas. I also find it a bit disturbing that the budget is increasing approx 9 million dollars over last year. How much of a tax increase does that equate to? Even though some departments are being consolidated, there really isn't a large dollar savings. Why do we need so many Solicitors at such high salaries? There isn't any money going into the stabilization fund and it will be interesting to see how close we are to prop 2 1/2. I do not understand some of the salaries in City Services - it appears to me that we have many chiefs in that department. Since Carlo was elected (I did not vote for him), I have given him the benefit of the doubt and also hoped that he would trim the fat from the budget. I was actually naive enough to think that the overall budget would remain the same as last year or even go down a bit. Perhaps Carlo has other plans to cut costs that he is not sharing with us at this time. I also have to question some of the raises that appear in a few of the departments for non-union employees. Increases in insurance, utilities and gas for the trucks, to name a few, are expected. In addition to a hiring freeze, salaries should be frozen for this budget. Because of the economy in general, freezes and layoffs are being experienced everywhere.
The Budget Committee definitely has their work cut out for them. I sincerely hope that they all do their homework, come prepared to the meetings and make some sense out of the budget. We surely do not need a repeat of the fiasco from last year and we certainly don't need the type of nonsense that is taking place at the Council meetings.
With all due respect to Carlo, he is doing a great job in many areas. It is actually refreshing to see him at the BOA and C.C. meetings communicating with the members in a civil and open manner. |
 |
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2008 : 11:04:36 PM
|
I've done a lot of high level analysis of the budget over the last 24 hours or so (but I still have a lot of details to go thru.) By my calculations, the increase in the budget is more like $8.5 million. This jives with what was printed in the Leader-Herald today, so let's go with that. Roughly $5.9 million of the budget increase will be funded by an increase in Chapter 70 aid. Without any further cuts, that leaves roughly $2.6 million that could be added to the tax levy.
There is already $2 million put aside to be put against the tax levy. Last year's levy limit was $72,049,304; 2.5% of that amount would be $1.8 million. Without the $4 million that was put against the tax levy last year, there was a only small amount of excess levy capacity left to work with, about $37,000. There is probably also some new growth but I have no idea how much. It appears the city has some resources to work with to avoid a Prop 2 1/2 situation. However, the question still needs to asked. I can't believe that after last year's fiasco that some information that clarifies this issue wasn't included in the budget packet. Maybe it was and it just didn't get posted online. I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Though I haven't been thru all the details yet, as a taxpayer, I, too, would have liked to have seen more cuts and less increases in this budget. One example. An appropriation for a "deputy" city solicitor ($82,551) that is more than the city solicitor can currently make by ordinance ($80,613.57). Seems excessive.
And some cuts make no sense either. Veterans benefits for FY09 are budgeted at $328,000 down from $397,818 when you have already spent $339,092 in FY08. Isn't this a cost that is expected to increase?
The city council has their work cut out for them. We'll all be watching. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 09:37:08 AM
|
Here is a quote from Just Wondering on 04/21/08 under the Must See TV thread.
"I had an opportunity to watch the show over the weekend for the 1st time. I find it amazing that nobody here has mentioned the fact that the budget looks like it will not include an increase. Skyrocketing health care and fuel costs.....less than expected aid from the state....and the budget stays the same. Impressive."
I guess it's not quite as impressive as people first thought. Hanlon's budget went up by 10% and this one is proposed to go up by 7%. I hope the city council finds some areas to do some cutting.
|
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 09:43:04 AM
|
| The veterans benefits that has gone down from last year is almost the same amount as the VSO salary. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 11:24:03 AM
|
| Massdee....I still think the spirit of my arguement is true. The overall budget increase for this year is a result of increases to fixed costs and school spending. The portion of the budget that the mayor has the most control over looks to have stayed pretty flat. I think that is a great accomplishement given the rise in fuel costs and associated downstream costs (electricity). Add into that any pre-negotiated union wage increases and it looks like the mayor has already done a good job of making cuts to his part of the budget. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
 Posted - 05/23/2008 : 11:27:22 AM
|
I hope the city council can find room to cut the bloated salaries especially the ones over the city ordinances.
|
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 11:32:11 AM
|
which ones are you referring to?
I think alot of the changes need to be explained....I'm sure the CC will at the very least ask the right questions. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 11:38:34 AM
|
| We can start with all the high priced lawyers and I hope the CC asks the right questions too but I don't have much faith after what I have been seeing. I guess it's a wait and see... |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 11:42:15 AM
|
doesnt all the "high priced lawyers" replace the fact that we were spending so much on external legal help?
I think I have seem posts from some people in the past complaining about the cost of hiring outside legal help so often. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 11:54:08 AM
|
| I've been told the Teamsters are willing to provide medical insurance for all city employees. (union and non-union) That line item shows a big increase. Does anyone know what the Teamsters are really offering and what they want from the city in return? Is it something our elected officials should be seriously considering? |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 3:27:55 PM
|
| Exactly my point. If we had to hire outside lawyers in the past I cant see rewarding with salaries that are above the ordinances. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 4:26:35 PM
|
I have not carefully scrutinized the budget. I have only scanned through it. Could anyone tell me, are there other areas of the budget that has increased besides fixed costs and school spending?
I know there are items not being funded as much or not at all for FY09 that were for FY08, and we still have a 7% increase.
The bottom line is our property taxes will be increasing yet again. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 5:54:55 PM
|
| I don't see a problem with paying more for legal help if you get higher quality staff. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 6:43:11 PM
|
| I dont mind higher quality staff, I do mind when we have ordinances for a reason and the administration goes and finds loopholes just to help themselves on the taxpayers dime. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 10:40:31 PM
|
| Reminder, Budget Hearings begin Thursday May 29,2008 at 6:00 PM. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Budget FY 09
