Thursday, March 24, 2011
MOST COUNCIL MEMBERS AT A LOSS
Old Timers on Council pleaded with those who attended the Council meeting to help them find ways to cut operation costs of the city as if its were the responsibility of voters to see inside the labyrinth of computers and employees. Council members are paid to be next in line to comprehend what goes on inside city hall. If they don't know, and the high officials don't, and Seward can't come up with answers, then appoint some of those folks who were there with pretty basic ways like shrink the population of city hall, cut employee benefits, eliminate assistant's assistants, and all employees drive their own cars. If cuts in service are necessary, grownups do not consider less police and firemen as the only solution. These are tough times and our beloved city hall sees the solution to be make it tougher for the tax payers. I remember when Presidents of this country and little town city managers were instructed by the Council "Go to go to your office, shut the door and don't come out until budget equals income. And start by cutting your own salary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
The charade continues. Does any rational person believe that council would consider the recommendations a panel of true cost cutters, individuals that can apply fiscal restraint measures? Council will instead appoint a panel of handpicked politicos and let them take the heat and blame when they submit their recommendations. They will provide cover while council moves ahead with their agenda.
Council already has pre-determined what they want to do. So they'll do their little show on the dias, shrug their shoulders, wave their hands, shake their head and utter weasel words before they tell us they will raise their means of funding government the best way they know how, taxes, fees, charges.
Suffolkians elected council representatives to make the hard decisions. If they fail to do so and make a mockery of the budget process, they should be run out of town on a rail.
Vice Mayor Charles Brown is a brilliant mathematician and corporate business man, he knows how to fix the budget problem. If he doesn't we'll let his employer know.
The city's budget was said to be cut to the bone three years ago. I remember the mayor and the previous city-campaign manager repeatedly stating that. So what were they cutting since then, marrow? The double digit assessment increases triggered unparalleled government growth and borrowing. Add in the decision to take over the city road network from VDOT, the recent housing market collapse, the war on private enterprise and voila here we are. Council was warned by concerned citizens several of whom are participants in Inside Suffolk, so there is no excuse. They failed to restrain themselves and chose to ignore the same people they are supposedly now asking for help.
This council is playing with us the taxpayers in a game of Russian Roulette with an automatic and there is one in the chamber. The bad part is, its their gun.
Seward says the city is in its fourth year of budget reductions, and at the same time has cut about $17.3 million from the general fund since fiscal year 2007. During that time, city employees have been asked to take on more responsibilities, she said. The city also has slashed costs like outside leases, fleet expenses, supplies, marketing, training and more.
Areas to cut are “very limited and possibly exhausted,” Seward said."
Citizens think Suffolk city government grew uncontrollably on the backs of excessive--and we now know bogus--appraisals. There was no real justification for the amount of the increases in city employee numbers over the last half dozen years--except the money seemed to be there so they spent it. Sometimes Seward stretches things.
Steps to fix the Suffolk BUDGET:
1. Fire Budget Officer who told us all, that she does not know how to budget unless we always give her more money each year.
2. Fire the City Manager who says she has FULL FAITH in Budget Officer.
3. Cut all salaries above $35,000 a year by 5% and all budgets above $55,000 by an additional 10%.
4. Quit giving taxpayer money to everyone that is not involved in core government services like the SCCA, Fine Arts, HR Partnership and so on.
Once this is all done, cut the exising services and spending back to 2008 levels and it is all done in one days time and we have a balanced budget. Oh yea, also fire that Finance guy from Davenport too! All he wants to do is generate fees by redoing financing bonds and sending invoices for his bad advice.
Hard work, but we need someone to do it!
Linda to Selena; what are the other cities doing? Selena to Linda; as soon as I hear I'll get back to you. Linda to Selena; great we'll match it, nothing more for me to do here.
Anon 5:25 I agree council is playing Russian Roulette with Johnson holding the gun until everyone agrees with her.
Seward is a mouthpiece for the city administration. She will lie give false witness to achieve her goals. This is not a question it has been proven time and again she cannot be trusted to tell the truth, only what SCG and LJ want her to say. If Seward is forced out, there are plenty more where she came from.
Does anybody know whether we can use recall petitions to put Council Members who are asking the public how to do their jobs for them back in the private sector?
The problem with public employees at the middle to senior level is that they do this as a career choice. They talk to each other, cover for each other, manipulate their managers--most of whom also have very little private sector experience, and have no earthly idea how the rest of us--the 80,000 who are not employed by the city live, function, pay our bills, or commute more miles in a month than most senior city workers commute in a year!
They don't know what competition is. None of them have EVER prepared a zero based budget where you start from scratch, identify the missions that are legal requirements--the reasons municipal governments exist--and start adding up what the REAL requirements are and what the minimum staffing are to meet the basic requirements! And you continue building your budget until you reach within 10% of your budget and you stop--leaving the 10% for emergencies and rainy day needs.
BTW, police and fire protection happen to be two of those requirements that justify having a municipal government in the first place--unlike fully 40% or more of the city employees on Suffolk's payrolls today! So it's either due to incompetance or arrogance that whenever the city is challenged to cut their budget, they threaten to put first responder jobs on the cutting block first! Any elected official who even suggests or support that logic needs to be recalled! How do we start that process????
Why aren't dozens of other perqs, bennies, and nice to haves identified first? Because they have no intention of living like the rest of us. Too many public employess see themselves as being in the ruling class and it's our jobs to make them happy and satisfied!
But here are some examples of cost cutting that won't hurt US! Canceling free city staff and elected official memberships to the Y and city athletic facilities; forcing city employees to drive their own cars to and from home (except for police vehicles that serve a purpose when parked throughout the city); forcing senior employees to LIVE IN SUFFOLK (Anne Seward???); finding a city mouthpiece willing to work for $45K -65K per year instead of well north of $100K; eliminating the City Manager's car allowance which is more than sufficient to purchase a new car every couple of years!; getting rid of assistant department heads for any organization with less than 300 employees; hiring local auditors rather than David Rose's firm in Richmond; getting rid of the Economic Development group; stopping handouts to the fine arts center, Holiday Garden Inn, Taste of Suffolk, and the like; and dozens of other opportunities for those who have access to city books and know how to manage.
When the City gets serious about living within their means, we'll see it. And let senior staff threaten to leave and find employment elsewhere. Thank them for their service and let 'em go. They are far too comfortable now to be much good to us in this economic environment. And they surely don't know how to cut services that are not essential to a well managed city. They can't differentialte between the necessary and the nice-to-have now! Wish 'em well and send them on their way!
Since all of the funding for DT located projects,is being requested to be cut, Lets not leave out Sleepy Hole Park Golf Course including the Obici estate, I dont care if that is "funded" by private concerns, it too must go. Clear the lands and build the Taj Mahal the city "leaders" want to build in their honor for the long illegal and slow abortion it committed on downtown town for years.This procedure began about 30years ago. This council and past councils never gave the downtown the chance to live nor did they want it to.They denied the DT of public funds provided by taxpayers and did it quietly.Maybe the mayor when she leaves the public sector she and this counci, can all become paid advisors for Planned Parenthood. They surely know how to use public funds for killing and denying "oxygen" for life.Please complete the killing of DT by taking the Godwin Courts Building with them in their ambulance ride to the northern city. How long will it take for the new city to become what has been denied life? History will repeat itself you can count on it. Suffolk isnt that surprising when you think about it.
Downtown has always gotten more than a fair shake with tax money. Just total up all the spending on the hotel, court building, the new city hall and on and on. In fact it has gotten fat on the public-tit.
If downtown is so great, then let private enterprise raise it out of the depths and save it, but not with my taxes any more.
If City Council/City Manager is suggesting that the public safety departments have not been affected by the economy during the last few fiscal years, they are LYING. No other word for it. CC/CM has touted the fact that they have been able to cut the budget it the past few years without reductions in force; unfortunately layoffs may now be unavoidable. Rather than tell you the truth – they could lay off 1/3-1/2 of the people who work in the municipal center and not one citizen would feel the effects – they appeal to your fears and threaten to lay off police officers, medics and firefighters because” it’s the only thing left to do.” IT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE and I hope that you will all remember these falsehoods the next time you cast your vote.
To see the Police Chief up there drumming for the needs of council for more spending makes him look the part of the fool. Chief, stay in your office and avoid the politics, it will just harm your reputation. The big RV you now have would make a good fishing camper, so enjoy and keep a lid on it!
Anon 11:53.
That isnt the problem.The problem is over the last 30 years they have not invested in the city itself. Nothing in the way of intrastructure such as modern technology, improvements in sewer upgrades,cable etc etc. Most business in the DT area the private owners had to do this on thier own. The last fire downtown exposed this problem. It was nice to see how the city spent money with cosmetic dollars on the courts building and street. Now its clear it was just another waste and the attempt to keep the lipstick red on the "piggy" at the time. Now the "piggy" is a full grown "pig" that has a farm but no barn to protect it.The barn has fallen apart because it was ignored.This has nothing to with the SCCA or any other "piggy" DT. This began years ago, but the lipstick has been applied on some of these "pigs" to give the appearance the city leaders of the past 30 years and those of present did care.Capital improvemets were not provided for DT by choice.It wasnt an accident that this has happened.
Hopefully one day I hope to really hear Mr. Suffolk (Andy) speak out before he passes just as the DT will and has already.How fitting it would be sometime in the future they can build a building that is used for city services and name it after him.... In the "New Suffolk"
Post a Comment