|
|
|
Uploaded: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 10:59 AM
TONIGHT: Big cuts considered for city services
|
|
by Daniel DeBolt
Mountain View Voice Staff
After months of discussions with department heads, city manager Kevin Duggan has proposed budget cuts to fill a $6.1 million general fund deficit, including cuts to park maintenance, less water for landscaping, higher fees for services and less library, police and planning staff. The City Council is scheduled to provide feedback on the cuts during its regular meeting tonight.
"We would prefer not to recommend any of these actions," Duggan said on Monday. "Unfortunately we can't make a serious dent in the problem without consequences. You can't pretend things are better than they are."
Duggan is recommending $3.5 million in cuts to the $89 million general fund, including the elimination of 17 positions in various departments that are largely unfilled (a few filled positions will be vacated through attrition, transfers and consolidation). Another $240,000 will be raised through fee increases for preschool programs, Center for Performing Arts tickets and ball field use, among other things. About $2 million in reserves will fill the rest of the deficit in order to buy some time for additional cuts in the second half of the year.
"For thirst time in my career I'm recommending a budget that is not structurally balanced," Duggan said about the use of reserves.
Response times for fire and police services could be reduced due to additional cuts proposed for 2010-11 and beyond. These "tier 2" cuts include laying off three police "agents," five community police officers, three part-time assistants and two police records specialists -- for a total savings of $1.3 million. Other tier 2 cuts would reduce the number of firefighters kept on duty citywide from 21 to 19, saving a projected $850,000 in overtime costs.
The city is in ongoing discussions with its unions to address personnel costs, the city's single largest expense. Personnel costs are increasing by $3.8 million a year while projections show no revenue growth for the next few years.
The City Council is scheduled to provide feedback tonight, May 5, and on May 19 and June 2, before adopting a budget on June 9.
BUDGET PROPOSAL HIGHLIGHTS:
For the complete list of proposed cuts and fee increases this year, go here on the city's Web site and click on Attachment A of the May 5 City Council meeting packet.
Families would pay more for preschool
About 60 to 85 families, some of them low income, will have to pay $7 an hour for the city's preschool programs, up from $5 an hour, bringing the city more in line with what other cities charge. The change would generate about $62,000 annually.
MVCPA ticket fee would go up
Patrons of the Center for the Performing Arts attending a show costing more than $30 would be charged another dollar in city fees, generating $60,000 annually.
New ball field fee
Youth sports leagues would be charged $2 an hour for using the city's ball fields, generating $40,000 in annual revenue. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended $1.
Planning Department capacity reduced
Two unfilled senior planner positions will be cut, saving $270,000 a year.
Police administration capacity reduced
Two unfilled police department positions -- a half-time senior analyst and a systems specialist -- will be eliminated or consolidated to save $230,000.
Less water for parks, street medians
A 10 percent cut in water use for parks and roadways could mean that some plants will die over time, but would save the city $86,500 and save water.
Library positions cut
City management hopes a full-time librarian will leave his or her job soon, but in the meantime the city is using "transition funds" to save $103,000. Also, the elimination of a vacant library administrative analyst position will save the city $86,700.Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by curious, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on May 6, 2009 at 11:05 am This is just the beginning. Mountain View and almost all California government entities have a huge, unfunded, unsustainable and open ended retiree pension and medical insurance liability. And don't give me any baloney about government employees accepting lower wages for their rich benefits. Look at those wages. "Two unfilled senior planner positions will be cut, saving $270,000 a year." TWO positions! So each costs the city $135,000 and this does not include the amount needed to be set aside for the retirement benefits. I wish I could earn that in my private sector job. Read the news reports about the thousands of CA government retirees receiving more then $100K in retirement PLUS full medical benefits.
Now the teachers' union and Arnold are about to spend more than $15 million to get us to vote for the Propositions in the May 19 election so we can continue to tax ourselves to pay them.
Let's face it. We are the serfs and the public employees and their unions run this state for their benefit.
|
|
Posted by USA, a resident of the Monta Loma neighborhood, on May 7, 2009 at 3:10 pm The price you are quoting is the price it cost the city before that employee's taxes are taken out. That employee is taking home about $100k where he or she should go to the private sector and do the same job for $140K take home.
I am glad that the media can not walk into my employer's payroll department at Apple and ask for our pay so it could publish them (of course I am curious what my supervisor makes). I think the posting of peoples names along with their salaries is just bad taste in the ethics of journalism (I hope the Daily Post guys read that - but who cares...they are a bunch of college interns that haven't even seen the real world yet).
|
|
Posted by smart growther, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on May 7, 2009 at 4:04 pm Curious,
May be time to pack up and leave california. You are correct. the current process is not sustainable and politicians just engage in delay tactics hoping the bubble wont burst until they leave office. As to salaries, you need to compare apples to apples. Not all public salaries pay well but some pay more than the private sector and also include benefits that can average over 40%.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
