The Observation Deck

Observers,

I am pleased to announce the support of Firefighters Local 382 (AFL-CIO) which represents the members of the Lakewood Fire Dept.

"We are proud to announce our support for your re-election as Mayor of the City of Lakewood. Under your leadership, we have witnessed a surge in both residential and business development that previously seemed impossible for an inner ring suburb....your stewardship has earned our respect and endorsement. We look forward to your re-election so that we both may continue to proudly serve the citizens of Lakewood."

Lakewood Association of Firefighters Local 382

This endorsement is especially valued because the members of this organization thoroughly understand safety in Lakewood...they know the issues, they know the candidates and they know that since day one, under my administration, safety comes first.

I am proud to serve with each of them as well.

No hidden agendas, no ulterior motives

Mayor Tom George

What is this endorsement going to cost the City?

Bill Call wrote:What is this endorsement going to cost the City?

Bill


I think the term is one of the lowest pay raises in the county for Fire.

I could be wrong.




.

Bill--- The new contract with the Lakewood Firefighters calls for an increase of 2%, 2.5%, and 2.5% over the next three years. Compared to other cities this is one of the lowest rates of increase.
In another post you asked whether this mutually agreed upon contract with favorable rates could have been achieved by any of the other mayoral candidates.
Although that is a hypothetical question that may never be answered I do know that the firefighters have traditionally been strong in their negotiating while at the same time recognizing the reality of city finances.
Likewise, the administration has always sought to offer fair compensation while it is being pressed to do more with the available resources at hand.
All in all, it seems to be a fair, mutually arrived at agreement between two strong willed parties.
Stan Austin

Stan Austin wrote: All in all, it seems to be a fair, mutually arrived at agreement between two strong willed parties.
Stan Austin

The Mayor has done a good job in his negotiations with the various government unions. Overall his good relationship with those unions is a plus for the City.

The current budget document shows a 68% increase in leave and overtime hours since 2004. One of the largest increases has occured in Light duty time and injury time, those total hours have increased from 3,060 in 2004 to 7,301 in 2006, an increase of 138%.

If a private enterprise experienced that type of increase in "workers compensation" type lost hours there would be a concerted effort to find the cause.

What type of efforts are being made to control those costs?

Is the increase in those hours related to the City becoming self insured?

It should be noted that the firefighters union did not even interview either myself or Ed FitzGerald for potential endorsement. An interview process is standard for most organizations.

It is rumored that the Fraternal Order of Police took a vote to endorse Mayor George. Its funny how I would hear that just days before City Council is asked to approve their new contract after a prolonged period without one. Again, no interviews, I hope that is not the case.

I think it would also be helpful for the Mayor to clarify what he means by, "No ulterior motives, no hidden agendas."

Let me start off by saying that I haven't decided who I'm voting for as mayor, since I don't know all my options.

Mr.Demro,

what if they didn't want to endorse you or Mr.Fitzgerald, and were happy with all the things Mayor George has done for Lakewood Firefighters and the City of Lakewood?

It might be possible.


3 days left....

Hi,
How does this increase compare with the average income level of Lakewood over the last three years? Has our income collectively increased 2 to 2.5% in 2004, 2005 and 2006? How has our total population changed? Isn't this the main engine that delivers tax funds to the City?

Is there money in the budget for these increases? I know we can not run in the red so I was wondering how these increases are funded.

Does this increase for the firemen now dictate identical increases for other unions? Which ones? What will be the total costs of all these increases? How is that total number funded? I thought we were all tapped out as a City?

Is this endorsement also a statement of support for regionalism by this union?

I would like to pose a philosophical question to Mr. Farris and Mr. Call.

In a city whose population is declining steadily, is it better to save money by keeping the same # of public workers and freezing their wages? Or is it better to reduce the number of workers and give the ones who remain fair market raises?
The schools appear to have gone the second route.
On the face of it, I think it is the right way to go. Id rather have 100 happy workers than 110 unhappy ones (in the private sector, this might be called an improvement in producitivity).
But I recognize there might be a good argument the OTHER way, too.
And apparently the money was SOMEWHERE to be found for fire department raises, so obviously our city is not that destitute.

Hi,
Ms. Martinez did I miss something? You imply that we will be cutting the number of firefighters. Is that true? I hope we aren't. In fact I have a feeling that more firefighters might actually save us money. 20 or so part time firefighters could fill in when someone gets "sick".

Please correct me if I'm wrong but we as a City function with a Council that does ZERO planning for down the road spending. There is no projected budget for next year or for 5 years from now. This is something that some members of Council have been working with limited success to do.

So the increases are now the problem of Council (and us tax payers) in future years.

Donald Farris wrote:Hi,
Ms. Martinez did I miss something? You imply that we will be cutting the number of firefighters. .

Im not sure how you got that implication but it was absolutely not my intent. I have no knowledge of staffing levels in the fire department. I was reacting to your question about raises being issued when city income may not have gone up in similar fashion.

What IS true is that the schools have cut back their work force rather significantly over the course of time. No massive layoffs, but a few less bodies every year. The workers who are left get raises. My question is, is it better have a bigger, lower-paid work force or a smaller, higher-paid one?

Don, Dee, Bill, Ryan, others

While you all propose good questions, the point of this this thread was the support for Mayor Tom George.

The support of the police and fire especially after contract negotiations says plenty.

Instead of measuring the contract with cost of living, a much fairer way to judge the negotiation is in relation to what others cities gave in to the unions with.

Don, Bill and maybe Dee, we all know that a large part of contract negotiations is what others are paying. With the union at the table you can bet they want to start 3% higher than the highest, and 5% higher than the lowest.

With employment, being the single largest part of the budget it is fair to ask or wonder how the other candidates might have fared in contracts.

.

Hi,
Mr. OB you are correct. However, it is extremely difficult to know what was all in this contract (Salary increase is 1 aspect of total compensation). As difficult as that is, it is impossible to compare the total compensation of Lakewood's firefighters with that of the other cities.

Things like health care could easily be more expensive than the increase.

Why, I remember back 20 years or so, our school board promised the taxpayers there would be no increases for the teachers. Little did we know that while they got no salary increase the schools strapped us with a super increase of picking up the teachers portion of their retirement. This little benefit now and for ever more increases an increase by more. So, teachers get a 2% increase in salary now they also get that extra kick of the retirement fund. I point this out as an example of how difficult it is for us to see the total compensation.

Don

Easy answers to figure.

Contract value at January 1.

What was actually paid by December 31

It will be plus or minus the actual numbers.

As Ezra Pound said, "It is not rocket surgery."

Then as Bill and I did was listen to why the Fire Department ran over budget. A number that seemed very large quickly was whittled down by rules, laws, and other items. Most if not all of these items were mandates by the county and state. Not what Lakewood requested.

A large portion was overtime, some of that was easily explainable as well.

I am sure there is room for improvement.

But at what cost?


.

Hi,
Thanks, Mr. OB for clearing that up. We'll just wait a year or two then before we say what a great contract that is, okay?