Budget Hearing March 27(tonight)

[David Lay]

Thanks Jim, it was definitely one of the tougher meetings I've been to.

I was there for the entire meeting.

I could see the frustration in everyone's eyes, in Council members, the Mayor and audience alike. Staring a budget deficit and being forced to make cuts is no easy decision by any means.

To paraphrase the Mayor, I have to commend them for "taking the bull by the horns", confronting the budget crisis head-on, doing something about it now.

[Bill Call]

To paraphrase the Mayor, I have to commend them for "taking the bull by the horns" and confronting the budget crisis head-on and doing something about it now.

According to the recently released State audit of Lakewood's finances the general fund deficits are expected to be:

2008 $4.1 million
2009 $9.8 million
2010 $16.3 million
2011 $24.6 million
2012 $34.9 million
2013 $47.3 million

Virtually all of the increase in the general fund deficit is driven by increases in wages and benefits for City employees.

With these cuts the general fund deficits (by my estimation) should be:

2008 $0
2009 $1 million
2010 $4.3 million
2011 $8.6 million

If the unions agree to a freeze on wages for the next two years the general fund will have a small surplus through 2011. If the unions agree to a health plan with some co-pays and deductibles the City should have small surpluses for the next 5 years or so.

[Bryan Schwegler]

Bill, what would the numbers look like if you add in an inevitable income tax increase....say .5%?

[Ruthie Koenigsmark]

Jim,

There is never an excuse for being rude and condescending —especially to the people who you work for—the citizens of Lakewood—and ESPECIALLY at a time like this. We are all human, make mistakes and say things we shouldn’t—wants wrong with owning up to it and apologize or to do something to make ammends? Believe me most of use have been there and do understand. But saying nothing and making excuses is just not the answer.

I do agree with one point that you made that more pp should attend council meetings and generally become more involved—we are all in this together—and many hands make light work(and how many clichés can Ruthie fit in one sentence? : ) ! I am trying to do my part to get folks that I know jazzed to attend—there is the last budget meeting this Monday, and the next council meeting is Monday, April 7th. It would be helpful if attendees knew what points would be discussed prior to meetings in a less ambiguous format, just look at the city website...sheesh!

After this budget crunch is behind us—I am anxious to see what the Mayor and Council have planned to bring our city together for some happier times—I have very high hopes and expectations—and will help and support them in anyway I can—they only need to ask!

R

[Bryan Schwegler]

Jim,
It would be helpful if attendees knew what points would be discussed prior to meetings in a less ambiguous format, just look at the city website...sheesh!

I agree Ruthie. Greater transparency, increased information, and better publicity would probably get more people to attend.

For example, look at my first post in this thread, it's the exact copy from the Lakewood site announcing the meeting. First it was buried and luckily I knew where to look, but most people wouldn't. Second, look at the description, do you think most people would have any idea what was really going to be discussed at the meeting?

Maybe we need to amend the charter to require council meeting notices to be written in plain English so the average citizen has a better idea of what their government is doing?

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

After this budget crunch is behind us—I am anxious to see what the Mayor and Council have planned to bring our city together for some happier times

How about with starting to give the public the legal 10 minute limit on public comment instead of just two or three minutes.

That's a start.

between Starry Night, the Library expansion, Arts Festival, Kar Kulture Show, 4th of July festivities, and other things later on in the year, I'm sure there will be plenty of chances to "Kumbayah" and hold hands.

Can a person really have high expectations with a City Hall like this one? If so, I need the secret potion!

[Shawn Juris]

Can a person really have high expectations with a City Hall like this one? If so, I need the secret potion!

I know that fiscally responsible is a rather foreign concept these days but yes a City Hall like this one can provide high hopes. Trimming the excess and prioritizing is central to turning any entity around. While there have been histrionic expressions in favor of some of these programs proposed to be changed, they are not birth rights and need some scrutiny. If its decided that the future of Lakewood is to maintain the status quo including entitilements and public assistance during a budget deficit, then I would have little hope.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Jim,

There is never an excuse for being rude and condescending —especially to the people who you work for—the citizens of Lakewood—and ESPECIALLY at a time like this.
R

Ruthie

Of course you are correct, I just wanted to make a public note that Michael Dever was begging for attendance and coverage. The mayor also mentioned it once or twice.

Bryan

I met with a local group that is looking to do some amazing things with the coverage of Lakewood City Hall, and the Schools. Let's just say transparency will not be a problem if they get their way.

Dramatic to say the least.


.

[Bill Call]

Bill, what would the numbers look like if you add in an inevitable income tax increase....say .5%?

Assuming that the 33% income tax increase was proposed in January of 2007 and passed in May of 2007 and took affect in January of 2008 the general fund deficits would have been:

2008 $4.1
2009 $9.8
2010 $16.3
2011 $24.6
2012 $34.9
2013 $47.3

[Stephen Eisel]

Bill, what would the numbers look like if you add in an inevitable income tax increase....say .5%?

Assuming that the 33% income tax increase was proposed in January of 2007 and passed in May of 2007 and took affect in January of 2008 the general fund deficits would have been:

2008 $4.1
2009 $9.8
2010 $16.3
2011 $24.6
2012 $34.9
2013 $47.3

Why stop at .5%?

[Phil Florian]

Are meeting minutes published for this yet? The discussion has been mostly about how upset everyone was but little on specific details. What services have been placed on the block and by how much? What has been done in terms of talking with the contract employees about looking at contracts? What discussion has there been about layoffs since the original estimates (and revisions)?

It would be interesting to see these services specifically, discuss their ramifications and maybe come up with ways to "fill in" with something else. What is being done by the Lakewood Division of Aging that might be taken up by the Cuyahoga County Office on Aging? Are seniors at risk because of these changes or merely inconvenienced? Just curious.

[Bryan Schwegler]

Bill, what would the numbers look like if you add in an inevitable income tax increase....say .5%?

Assuming that the 33% income tax increase was proposed in January of 2007 and passed in May of 2007 and took affect in January of 2008 the general fund deficits would have been:

2008 $4.1
2009 $9.8
2010 $16.3
2011 $24.6
2012 $34.9
2013 $47.3

Those look like the same numbers you posted above which do not include an income tax increase of .5%.

[Whitney Gersak]

That is the thing, it was so unclear about what was actually cut at the meeting. I do know they said they are going to reroute seniors to county services, but they don't know how smoothly it will go and have no money to really do it.
They pretty much said what WAS NOT being cut, and even then it wasn't totally clear.
This is all from my personal notes, is not written in stone and I could have misheard any or all of this.

They are combining the senior centers down to two, home delivery of meals is gone, transportation for those under 60 that are not disabled will be gone. Not filling 3 postions saved them 90k, they received a trust for some of the transportation costs (110k) and lost the HUD redistribution.( saved 26k)
Dept of Health is not going to be around at all, if I heard it right. They are going to use the Cuyahoga Board Of Health.

Animal Control will not be "on-call", those calls will be delt with by the police. Shelter stays open.

Youth Services: H2O stays and so does the Family System of Care. I dont know what was cut, but programs were reduced.

The Early Childhood Development program is losing some programs (cant find which ones) keeping the Drop-Ins and the CBGB funded programs.

Hope that helps some.
Whitney

That is all I got out of the 2 hours I was there. They did cut alot, but didn't seem to get around to saying what exactly was cut.

[Phil Florian]

Whitney, thanks! That was a good summation. It does seem clear that, if accurate (as you noted, hard to say) that they are cutting things that could be to a certain level picked up by other agencies in the area. Cuyahoga County already has a fair amount of Early Childhood services that all county residents can handle. That seemed like it might be a redundant program. Some of the senior programs were likely redundant, too. I wonder if some of the home delivered meals could be directed at the charitable community to pick up the slack? I wonder how many they served? There are a variety of services that do home delivered meals already. I assume the city merely paid for one of their services. Maybe this could be the focus of more charitable giving to support. This will be a big year for charitable organizations to look and see what got cut and what can be replaced in other ways.

Anyway, thanks for your take on this Whitney.

[Whitney Gersak]

No problem Phil.
Most of the Early Childhood Programs are not redundant with programs offered though the county, but some of the Senior ones were.. Lets just hope the city can try to help the seniors facing the loss of programs to transfer to county programs somewhat easily.

Oh and they had done this previous to the budget meeting, but they combined court personal jobs and saved 76k.