| Welcome to Livonianeighbors.com. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. To ensure your privacy, never use personal information in your screen name or email address ("janedoe@hotmail.com" or "Billysmom" for example). Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| City braces for $4 million revenue loss; Observer-August 26, 2010 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 27 2010, 08:04 PM (298 Views) | |
| Administrator | Aug 27 2010, 08:04 PM Post #1 |
|
Administrator
|
City braces for $4 million revenue loss By KEN ABRAMCZYK • OBSERVER Staff Writer • August 26, 2010 Racked by falling property tax values, slashed state shared revenue and tax appeals by Ford and General Motors, the city of Livonia is bracing for a devastating $4 million hit in expected revenue for 2011. That was the grim scenario painted for Livonia City Council Monday at a committee meeting on a preview of next year's $46 million budget with Mayor Jack Kirksey and Director of Finance Mike Slater. Slater and Kirksey will release the 2011 proposed budget to the council Sept. 15. Kirksey and Slater will talk about the budget with department heads and the city's unions over the next few weeks about further cuts. On the revenue side, the city faces several financial challenges: •Taxable values on business and residential properties are expected to fall 12.1 percent in Livonia next year, down to just under $4.4 billion from just under $5 billion, according to figures from Wayne County. •General Motors and Ford Motor Co. have appealed assessments for GM's Powertrain plant, which closed earlier this year, and the Ford Parts and Transmission plants for $2 million a year for fiscal years 2010 and 2011. Kirksey explained to the council about what the automakers are doing in terms of property valuation. “One of the major manufacturers (it was later identified as Ford Motor Co.) hired a private company to depreciate the property,” Kirksey said. The state Tax Commission adopted the figures, which fell about 50 percent, without doing any other studies, Kirksey said. “This is a far, far more significant dynamic than any of us anticipated,” Kirksey said. •General fund property tax revenue is expected to fall $2.8 million or 9.6 percent to just under $27 million. Those figures don't include the potential impact of the Ford and GM appeals. Slater forecasts further declines of that revenue to $23.6 million in 2012. By 2013, that revenue is expected to fall a staggering $8.4 million or 27.4 percent since 2013, Slater said. •State shared revenue has declined from $11 million in 2000 to $7.5 million. If the base amount from 2000 were adjusted for the consumer price index, the city should receive $14 million. “The difference is $6.5 million each year that we have to make up somehow,” Slater said. •The city's health care costs now are $13 million for employees and retirees. “This is unsustainable,” Slater said in response to a question from Councilwoman Laura Toy. “We've more than doubled (costs) in 10 years.” The city has already trimmed the budget through the years, going from 730 funded positions in 2000 to 602 in 2010-11 budget, a decline of 17 percent. “If we had not done this, we would have an additional cost of $10.5 million a year,” Slater said. Last year, six full-time and six part-time employees were laid off. “This year, that is still being discussed,” Slater said. Most departments cut budgets 9 percent, but some did not, Slater said. Those budgets were still being discussed. Even with those cut budgets, the city was short about $1,8 million, Slater said. Services also earmarked with specific millages, namely roads, library and recreation, will also be impacted by the declining property tax values, On Tuesday, Slater said the amount of construction would be less next year, libraries would operate with the same hours and less staff and hours may be adjusted at the recreation center with fewer equipment purchases budgeted for that facility. “There are a lot of moving pieces with the community rec center,” Slater said. On Monday, Toy asked Kirksey and Slater whether furloughs would be considered before layoffs. Kirksey has notified five unions, three with open contracts, about the budget situation to discuss wage and benefit packages. “We're hoping it is part of the solution,” Slater said. “We don't have any firm commitments from any of the unions, but these are being discussed.” Step pay and longevity were among issues in discussion, Slater said. “The mayor has indicated a number of times his goal is to save jobs. To save jobs is to provide services.” Slater was asked Tuesday if layoffs were inevitable. “No, I would not say they are,” Slater said. But a reduction in employees is, he added. “We'll do as much as we can through attrition.” Elected and department heads had voluntary pay reductions for two and a half years, and took furlough days, Kirksey said. Councilman Brian Meakin asked about creating a financial incentive for employees to retire, thus driving costs down. Slater wanted such a program to make sense for the city. “The only way it saves money is if we don't replace them,” Slater said. Councilwoman Maureen Miller Brosnan asked whether there were discussions about health care. Slater expected the topic to be discussed in the open contracts. “It has the potential to be a huge part of the savings, but it gets difficult to derive savings from it,” Kirksey said in reference to co-pays and the amount of the budget gap. He also added that in negotiations, there is a strong resistance to make these changes. Brosnan also asked about the city starting shorter operational hours at city hall, like 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., similar to Westland. Slater said those hours could be part of the discussion of furlough days. Toy also inquired about the city selling some of its properties. “It is the worst time in the world to sell properties,” Slater said. Even if the city sold a property, such as a golf course, that one-time revenue boost would not solve the city's structural problems of its budget. Councilman John Pastor asked Kirksey whether there were discussions with other cities on partnerships for inspections, road maintenance and assessing for cost savings and potential revenue sources. Pastor, who is also running for state Senate, said state lawmakers needed to “fight harder” for more state shared revenue. But Slater said the Department of Public Works would have a difficult time maintaining more roads, in another community, because of staff. Slater also added that the city was “extremely lean.” Livonia has 6.2 employees per 1,000 residents, lower than the 8.4 per 1,000 residents in communities across southeast Michigan, or 8.9 employees per 1,000 residents in the cities of Southfield and Dearborn, according to figures from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Nationally that number is 10.1 employees per 1,000 residents. Meakin suggested the city talk about reimbursement for mutual aid responses with adjoining communities and asked Kirksey where that topic would be discussed. Kirksey suggested the Conference of Western Wayne. kabramcz@hometownlife.com | (313) 222-2591 http://www.hometownlife.com/article/20100826/NEWS10/8260619/1027/City+braces+for++4+million+revenue+loss Mayor: ‘At an impasse' with AFSCME By LeAnne Rogers • OBSERVER STAFF WRITER • January 10, 2010 As Westland Mayor William Wild talks about preparing a budget to deal with an expected $3.5 million deficit in 2010-11 — a number that may reach $12 million the following year — he mentions a quote from Detroit Mayor Dave Bing. “He said, ‘Cities are service providers, not job providers.' If there is a cheaper way to do things, we need to do it,” Wild said. “We're going to right-size. We're looking at what furlough days would do. We're looking at outsourcing. The unions won't like that.” That could be an understatement. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees local president Larry Roman, who heads the city's largest bargaining unit, didn't return calls for comment. But Wild said that a year of bargaining with AFSCME, which represents about 125 public services, clerical and parks and recreation staff, hadn't resulted in any agreements. “I was looking for concessions with AFSCME on wages, health care and pension. We are at an impasse,” Wild said. “I'm trying to get AFSCME settled, but I may be going to council with layoffs in that unit soon. My folks are making cuts. That isn't going to get us there, but it's a start.” Wild was referring to mayoral appointees such as department heads and employees of the mayor's office who gave up a scheduled 2-percent pay increase and will receive a reduced car allowance. Wild will also be meeting with other bargaining units — a UAW local representing supervisors whose contract expired Dec. 31 and police and firefighters unions with contracts in effect through 2012. “We will try to get concessions. We've looked at the buyouts Garden City did. It would be 75 bodies to lay off if we have to resolve the deficit with bodies,” Wild said. “We're putting together a buyout plan in combination with layoffs and concessions.” Although the council adopts one-year budgets, Wild said he is looking at the budget over two years and is looking to make cuts in 2010-11 that will move toward addressing the projected 2011-12 deficit. During the current fiscal year, the general fund budget is nearly $60 million. Police and firefighter union representatives are scheduled to meet Tuesday with Wild. Westland Police Officers Association President Norm Brooks said his members, patrol officers and dispatchers, understand that the city may have some financial issues. “We're open-minded. We have offered to sit down, but that hasn't happened. We're willing to talk,” Brooks said. “We've been offered nothing by the mayor. We've got a meeting Tuesday.” lrogers@hometownlife.com | (313) 222-5428 http://www.hometownlife.com/article/20100110/NEWS24/1100449/Mayor-#8216-At-an-impasse-with-AFSCME User Image myboat wrote: Two percent increase, thats a laugh, the directors just got a 5% increase six months ago. 1/10/2010 8:39:01 AM nomoreperks wrote: I couldn't believe how much money the city directors are making over $90,000.00. If the mayor was serious about cutting expenses all he has to do is look around his office and city hall. Cut all the directors pay and eliminate car allowances completely for all city employees, police and fire depts. I think the mayor would have a lot more leverage with the city unions if they saw that real cuts were being made at city hall. These directors make double what the average city employee makes and along with the perks they receive it is obscene. So how about it Mr. Mayor why don't you lead by example? I'm sure you could find some some qualified directors for say $55,000.00 per year. 1/10/2010 12:13:05 PM JustaNumber wrote: Mayor Wild said, “I was looking for concessions with AFSCME on wages, health care and pension." . . .Why just for AFSCME workers?? If concessions are made to these workers, it should include ALL the workers - Administration, Directors, Supervisors, Police, and Fire. The AFSCME are the lowest paid of all the city workers - concessions should be city-wide. 1/10/2010 6:21:48 PM ImaBeMe wrote: Sounds like the same old story-Mayor wants to balance the City's budget on the backs of the AFSCME workers. God forbid the Directors and Department Heads should take any cuts. He mentioned a reduction in car allowances? How about ELIMINATING ALL CAR ALLOWANCES like other cities have done? And he left out the part about the Directors getting a 5% salary RAISE while asking AFSCME workers to take cuts! It sounds to me like the Mayor has no respect whatsoever for his employees and is trying to place the Citys problems squarely on THEM. Good luck trying to run your city with 75 fewer employees-I'm sure the Directors and Department Heads will be willing to work 24-7 to get the job done! 1/11/2010 6:29:30 PM jessejamesed wrote: Let the City balance the budget on AFSCME workers?What about the contract that the fire and police departments got last year with an 12%increase over four years and no concessions.The Directors recieved an 5% increase six months ago but gave up their longevity checks?That still sounds like an pay increase to me.Their real heroes.Their talking about contracting work out?Good Luck with our services Westlanders. 1/11/2010 6:54:05 PM skeptical2009 wrote: Replying to jessejamesed: Let the City balance the budget on AFSCME workers?What about the contract that the fire and police departments got last year with an 12%increase over four years and no concessions.The Directors recieved an 5% increase six months ago but gave up their longevity checks?That still sounds like an pay increase to me.Their real heroes.Their talking about contracting work out?Good Luck with our services Westlanders. jessejames............Do you really believe AFSCME employees deserve the same pay, or cuts, as specialized and professional employees of the city? Those AFSCME employees who have valuble skills will probably be retained. It is those who don't that will probably be laid off or asked to take a pay cut. It sucks, but that's the way life goes. 1/11/2010 8:29:18 PM jessejamesed wrote: No i don't and i believe AFSCME workers make half of what the directors make.I don't think that will happen as i believe AFSCME is union and if they we're to layoff,i believe it would be by seniorty,not skill wise.All as i'm saying is they should be fair about the cuts. 1/11/2010 8:55:46 PM myboat wrote: In response to skeptical2009 "specialized professional employees" HA more like "The Friends and Family Plan" 1/11/2010 8:59:40 PM hockeytown316 wrote: Don't forget that the new department heads that were hired under the mayor also started at 100% of their salary. With the job market the way it is in Michigan you could replace all department heads with MBA's at half the salary. 1/12/2010 10:09:21 AM 50yrsinWestland wrote: I do agree that the directors should have taken whatever cuts are being proposed to the local union leaders. The reason being that EVRYONE who works for any city around here has to realize that things are not the same AND they will never be the saem as they were 10 or even 5 years ago. Our fiar city will never have the money it used to have even if every house and building is filled. The debt for past employees is way to high to support any currrent or new employees. The directors do not make $100,000 as posted here. They make between 68 - 88,000 (not including the police and fire chief, they make 90+). The salaries were posted in the last budget report. You could not pay new people half - but you could pay around $65,000. The benefit package is what needs to be fixed. It current costs almost the same as the salary amounts - for all employees, from the top to the bottom, and that is even more ridiculous. this is what needs to be reduced by half. 1/12/2010 6:40:47 PM dogtailz wrote: Are our leaders so short-sighted that they couldn't see this coming when they were approving the police and fire contracts with wage increases and no cuts in benefits? At the time, Councilman Pickering pointed out the mess that was to come and said they couldn't afford these contracts, but they pushed ahead anyway. Now suddenly the situation is dire. The mayor's staff has taken a "reduction" in their car allowances?! That cut might cover the cost of the mayor's new furniture! There are even a few directors, including the mayor, who get both a car allowance and a car! And what about this new attorney they've hired to push the contract down AFSCME's throat? How much is he costing our city? Isn't the current Personnel director, who has negotiated previous contracts, an attorney, also? Why do we need to spend even more money on another? Unwise spending and mismanagement has now boiled down to cutting city employees, and in turn, city services. 1/12/2010 9:40:23 PM rodneydfield wrote: You are correct, that contract should not have been passed. The city already had meetings on 2 saturdays, telling them how bad it was going to be in 2010 thru 2013. By the way NOBODY gets both a car and a car allowance - It is now and always has been either - or on that bennie. Lets not exaggerate the situation any worse than it already is. How about the court employees that get to do whatever they want and give raises and increased benefits without a vote of the Council or even the Mayor? 1/12/2010 11:09:25 PM ALMAC wrote: IF the situation is that dire, neither the Mayor nor any of his directors, except for the police and fire officials, should get a car or a car allowance. I wonder how much money that would save? 1/13/2010 8:19:06 PM rodneydfield wrote: Replying to ALMAC: IF the situation is that dire, neither the Mayor nor any of his directors, except for the police and fire officials, should get a car or a car allowance. I wonder how much money that would save? Good question, lets figure it out: 4 cars (Mayor, both chiefs, and the DPS director) at approximately 40,000 each = $160,000, spread over 4 years = $40,000 per year. 16 directors/supervisors car allowances at $1500 per year = $24,000 per year. Total cost per year for cars and car allowances = $64,000. Salary / Directors (w/benefits)= $110,000 Average police cost (w/benefits)= $105,000 Average firefighter (w/benefits)= $100,000 Average hourly employee cost (w/benefits)= $80,000 per year We can almost save one job by eliminating the cars and allowances. The city needs to find almost 5 million dollars for the budget to be passed this June. $64,000 will help, but will not get us there. 1/13/2010 9:00:26 PM ALMAC wrote: Replying to rodneydfield: >We can almost save one job by eliminating the cars and allowances. The city needs to find almost 5 million dollars for the budget to be passed this June. $64,000 will help, but will not get us there. Thank you for that calculation. Yes, it's a drop in a very large bucket. Pay freezes and reductions will probably need to also made for both the union workers and administration members. I know where I work all the executives took a 10% pay cut, and so far, the workforce has not been asked to do the same, but who knows, that may be next. 1/13/2010 9:58:58 PM edjew wrote: Replying to JustaNumber:It is very simple. Individual contracts are negotiated individually. They can say: "hey Bob, you need to take a 10% pay cut or we're going to have to replace you". Replacing one person won't cripple a city. The labor unions, however, are a different story. There are exponentially more of them and negotiating a contract covering hundreds of workers has more impact. Bottom line is that none of these public employees deserve lifetime medical benefits and pensions when the people paying for them(tax payers) don't have the same benefits. Mayor Wild said, “I was looking for concessions with AFSCME on wages, health care and pension." . . .Why just for AFSCME workers?? If concessions are made to these workers, it should include ALL the workers - Administration, Directors, Supervisors, Police, and Fire. The AFSCME are the lowest paid of all the city workers - concessions should be city-wide. 1/15/2010 12:21:41 AM |
![]() |
|
| want2know.. | Aug 28 2010, 02:37 PM Post #2 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There's quite a discussion going on about this article on the hometownlife.com website. 26 readers have already written comments that show up underneath the typed article. If interested, you should be able to access it by clicking on the link in the Administrator's first post above. Many people are giving suggestions on where/how the city can save money. I hope they are writing/e-mailing the mayor as well instead of just posting on a board! |
![]() |
|
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Livonia Neighbors Forum · Next Topic » |








![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
