IN A DISCUSSION that will surely span many meetings, the Ventura City Council on Monday will start the process of cutting $4.3 million from the general fund operating budget for the next fiscal year.
The series of cuts were developed with the guidance of 12 committees comprised of more than 70 staff members and - a first this year - members of the Ventura Chamber of Commerce Budget Task Force. When looking at what to trim, the committees used the Budgeting for Outcomes process which prioritizes city services and analyzes what city tasks are best helping to meet the stated goals of the city's general plan. $3 million in mid-year cuts have already been made.
Because of the recent economic downturn across the state, all our cities are looking at declining revenues and accompanying budget cuts. The collection of sales taxes in Ventura is down nearly 20 percent and property tax collections are expected to decline.
The council is free to adjust and decline the proposed cuts, a process which is sure to draw lively discussion and multiple public speakers. "We can't absorb $4 million in cuts by buying cheaper pencils," Mayor Christy Weir said.
DON'T EXPECT A RUBBER STAMP from the council. "It will be important to protect items that strengthen or support the generation of revenues," Councilmember Ed Summers explained. "While there is a current downturn, several indicators show a stabilization at the end of this year or early next year. In looking at the impacts to Community Development and Planning, it would be negligent not to be in a position to attract capital and projects as soon as there are positive signs in the economy."
A full and rather lengthy list of the proposed reductions is available from the city's Web site. I'll highlight a few here:
• Reducing sidewalk, curb and gutter repair by 60 percent.
• Reducing the Pierpont lanes sand clearing schedule by 50 percent.
• Closing some sports-specific venues in the city's Recreation Classes and Camps.
• Reductions of 50 percent to renovations at selected parks.
• Reducing mowing, trimming, maintenance and cleaning in public parks and public areas.
• Eliminating the Pesticide-Free pilot program at the Community Park.
• Reducing the Cultural Arts Grants program to local arts groups by $40,000.
• Reducing the Ventura Visitors and Convention Bureau budget by $83,000.
• Eliminating the Sister Cities Program.
• Eliminating a support position for street fairs and festivals.
• Reducing the Community Partnerships Granting program to non-profit agencies by $44,000.
• Eliminating a grant analyst, secretary, two Police Service Officer positions, five cadets and other extra help in the police department.
• Reducing foot patrols in Downtown Ventura on Friday and Saturday nights.
• Reductions in standby and overtime pay for the police department.
• Eliminating funding for the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.
• Eliminating the PSO position to staff police storefronts. The Montalvo site would be closed. The site at the Pacific View Mall would remain as a security area and the Westside center will be available for police activities but would not be staffed by police personnel.
• Altering two consultant contracts (Victoria Avenue Specific Plan and Saticoy and Wells Community Plan) which would place more work on staff but save approximately $215,000.
• Eliminating water testing in the Ventura Keys area.
• Reducing City Council meetings to three a month
• Mandatory 9/80 workweek for city staff (with the exception of police and fire) and shutdown of non-essential areas of City Hall during the winter holiday period.
Several capital improvement projects have already been deferred and the city is under a hiring freeze. Some programs, such as the family activities at the Westpark Community Center, will be underwritten through community partnerships. "We had a choice of reducing programs there or increasing revenue, and while it is going to be a major stretch, Westpark is so critical in the Westside, that we made the commitment to find an additional $29,000 a year," said Community Services Director Elena Brokaw.
With a list of cuts this long, it was wise to move City Council meeting start times to 6 p.m. That change begins Monday.
City staff are working on a postcard which will ask residents to list their budget priorities for the city. What do you think should be cut?
Note: The preview function in the comments is still not working. Please just hit "post."
We need a general use sales tax measure like the one Oxnard is proposing and I'm told that only needs 51% to pass.
Venturan, you have surely lost your marbles. Do you think the City Council is really going to propose this after all the heat they've been getting over fees and taxes?
I think Marie is looking for "realistic" options here, many of which have been identified on this list already. I would add a general principle of "not funding any new programs or projects that can either be undertaken by City staff, or deferred into the future, or dropped completely." The classic example here would be the study that was done on Victoria Avenue (for over $200,000) to see if we should narrow the City's main thoroughfare.
I think there are opportunities on the revenue-generating side of the equation as well that haven't been included. One idea is to improve the City's economic development efforts by enticing more commercial development into the City to improve the sales tax base. There are many ways to do this, and I think the Chamber might play an important role in coming up with some concrete ideas.
If you look on the list of cuts, consultant time for the Victoria Specific Plan is indeed being pared.
You and I have been around and around on this before, but Victoria was never recommended for "narrowing." The plan recommended dividing the street into 3 express lanes on each side, plus a slip lane on the edges for "local" traffic (turning into businesses, allowing for parking and wider sidewalks, landscaping, etc.) It wouldn't have narrowed Victoria, it would have actually widened it. However, when more study was done (environmental review) it was determined that there are certain sections where this widening wasn't possible -- not enough right-of-way. So they scrapped that part of it.
I cut and paste this paragraph over and over every time you trot out the "narrowing Victoria" myth. Maybe I'll program it in Java script to run along the bottom of the page just for you. :-)
The business incubator program is on Monday's agenda, too. That would encourage more businesses. Take a look at it and tell me what you think:
http://www.ci.ventura.ca.us/newsmanager/articlefiles/4334-item%2011.pdf
Marie, first let's get real about the Victoria narrowing plan, shall we? Ultimately, it was promoting a complete redesign of Victoria that would turn it into a Parisian boulevard, with diagnol parking slots fronting businessess, presumably shops and cafes, that would magically appear along this major thoroughfare through the City that bisects the 101 & 126 freeways, as well as Telephone & Telegraph Roads (2 major arterials through town).
This was a stupid idea, pushed by two completely out-of-touch City Councilmen, Fulton and Morehouse, who were egged on by an equally out-of-touch City Manager. Bill Fulton at least had the guts to admit it was a dumb idea when he realized the public was ready to skewer him and the other proponents when the plan became public. They backed off of it because they realized it was a plain stupid idea (after having wasted over $200,000 of the public's money on it). They may have used the right-of-way issue as an excuse, but the truth is they could read the writing on the wall.
Why can't we just admit this and move on? Just like the 911 tax was a stupid idea. The City is now on the verge of being sued over it and who loses in this? You guessed it, the taxpayers - again!
I have heard a little about the Business Incubator program. It sounds like an innovative idea. Thank God for the Chamber!
It was a concept that was not going to be introduced overnight, but rather over the span of maybe 20 years as development changed along that street. It was a proposal for thought and study, in the same mode as the proposal to cover over 101 Downtown, which you somehow like. It would have really transformed the area from what it is now, sort of a hodgepodge.
I believe Mr. Fulton, who you have denigrated so badly here, is also behind the business incubator program, which you are attributing to the Chamber. Fulton and Ed Summers have really been the advocates for this.
Oh, c'mon, Marie. Bill Fulton admitted it was a bad idea, why can't you? Go ahead, ask him. Far from denigrating him, I was actually complimenting him for admitting his mistake in my previous post.
On your second comment, I'm not sure who came up with the original idea for the Business Incubator program. It's possible that you know more about this than I do. But, the Chamber, specifically Zoe Taylor and the Commerce and Education Committee, are actually running the program. The further the City stays away from it, the better off we'll all be. They have already shown how much they don't know about economic development.
To be honest, I felt about the original Victoria Plan the same way I do about covering over 101 Downtown: I love the vision but doubt the practicality. But sometimes it's good to dream.
The difference, of course, being that the covering of 101 would result in improved connections for visitors between the downtown and the beach area, whereas, the Victoria plan would disrupt an already vibrant, practical thoroughfare running through the heart of the City.
The very last thing they should be cutting is the foot patrols downtown on weekend nights! This is just bone headed.
I agree, Skippy. Not a good idea. This is what you call a "Statue of Liberty" strategy. Throw something out there that everyone will become outraged about, then restore it is seeming response to the outrage, while you're cutting something they're not paying as much attention to.
Marie,
Is it common in Ventura to develop the budget with outside interest groups? Although we may agree with the policy priorities of the chamber, it is an interest group.
Do labor unions and developers get positions on the committees?
Brian, the difference is, that while it is technically an interest group, the Chamber feeds the City's economy with jobs and tax revenue. Therefore, it should have a special seat at the table when it comes to formulating a future budget strategy for the City.
Sorry for butting in, Marie. I know the question was directed to you and I'm sure you'll have your own perspective to offer as well.
I think one reason they asked the Chamber to participate was that every year the Chamber develops its own budget which is presented to the Council and then basically ignored. This, and the Chamber PAC's opposition to P6 -- the public safety tax measure -- caused a bit of a deterioration in relationships. This is no secret. I believe this was an effort to mend fences, to bring an outside business perspective to the table and educate citizens on how complex it is to run a city.
I often hear folks second guessing how budget decisions are made when they don't always understand the funding mechanisms.
The experiment worked well. I think everyone felt it was worthwhile. After the committees made their recommendations, the cuts were even further refined by city staff to what I linked to above. Some things were taken off the table. For instance, the Albinger Museum was originally slated to be closed. They decided to look for alternative revenue sources instead to fund it, which may mean community partners.
I expect the council to pull some other items as well. We'll see.
I just got Marie and Mongo to agree on something!
I understand they are an important and powerful interest group but I am reassured since both of you agree that they are an interest group.
Hey, we've agreed on things before. Right, Mongo? Can you name them?
You're right, Marie, we have. One that comes to mind is the VCORD building height limitation measure. I think we're both opposed to that.
Marie, as I recall, we both support the City continuing to provide funding to the Visitors' & Conference Bureau. This has a great return on investment, since the money comes back to us in the form of additional TOT and spending in the local community by visitors and tourists.
See, Brian? Mongo and I can agree on things.
TOT?
Transient Occupancy Taxes. This is the tax you pay when you rent a hotel room.