DEEP CUTS TO CITY SERVICES are in our future, a somber Ventura City Manager Rick Cole told the City Council on Monday night. A worsening economy bringing with it a drop in city revenues will necessitate a restructuring of how the city is run.
"These will be the most difficult and painful choices that have been faced by at least six of the seven of you in your service on the City Council," Cole said. "The impact on services, the impact on individual employees will be significant, severe and controversial. ..."
"You will have to look the public in the eye and say 'I'm sorry, ma'am, we don't do that any more.' "
Cole estimated that 20-30 jobs would be gone from city government by next year. Some might be handled through retirements and resignations, he said, but it is not possible to make up all the difference through attrition alone.
Cole's words followed a presentation from Chief Financial Officer Jay Panzica which showed a $4 million revenue shortfall for the current 2008-09 fiscal year. The gap could grow to be as much as $8 million by next year. This comes on the back of a $4.3 million cut to this fiscal year's budget and a $3 million midyear cut a year ago.
Lower sales tax revenues coupled with an expected loss of vehicle license fee revenues from the state and other factors helped contribute to the misery. Other cities around the country are experiencing similar difficulties. The City of Los Angeles, for instance, is facing a deficit of $110 million.
City staff will recommend a restructuring plan which should come to the council in March. The plan will be part of a new multi-year budget system.
"We need to do fewer things and do them better," Panzica said.
Fasten your seatbelts.....its gonna be a bumpy ride. I do not envy our leaders facing the task at hand. Hopefully the cuts and elimination of jobs will be a reflection of relative costs and benefits. Ideas that come to mind include closing or combining library services. Closing city hall every Friday and shutting off lots of streetlights the area businesses close or completely in residential areas. What should not be cut are police and fire services or funding for vital homeless programs. Probably most at risk are services like nonprofit grantsN tourism programs and recreation programs. Cuts in those areas might seem on the surface to be more acceptible but would be cutting off our nose as the long term loss of revenue generated and enhancment to our overall quality of life would mean years of trying to regrow working systems.
Fund police - but make them address quality of life crimes downtown--NOT laying DUI traps everywhere all weekend. Get out of yer damn cars and police the streets at 1 AM. Stop the whisky tango vagrants from scaring off our hotel patrons and tourists. Then the tax revenue generated will take care of all the rest.
Cut the fat: Stop giving cash to "artists" out of the general fund. Since when is subsidizing someone's lifestyle/profession the work of local government? Some of the same people in this town have won "emerging artist" grants over and over again. What is their deliverable for getting honored and paid to "create"? Whats the payback? Forcing their brilliant selves to STAY here?
I agree with the cash for artists comment - thats insanity ... Do they at least have to volunteer their time for any charities? To save is money layoff the city staff that spend all day managing this process and other non-essential acts and paper pushing. And when the economy rebounds I'd like to see grants for "emerging accountants" or any other field that actually requires some education--how about teaching our kids some money management skills ... so they dont end up starving, and begging for subsidy - like artists.
Our cute little hamlet by the sea is out of money.
Hmmmm......
Our city council / planning division has told businesses that wanted to open to go away.
Our city council / planning division / voters have decided that we can't develop acres and acres of land.
Our city council / planning division wants us to wait for "high-wage, high value jobs".
Meanwhile the city is possibly forced to lay off employees, reducing services that your and my tax dollars pay for.
Maybe someday the will get a clue as to unintended consequences.
Actually the voters of the entire county, through the SOAR initiative, said no to paving over our farmlands. Here in Ventura we also wanted our hills preserved and we said so through the ballot box.
Our economy will eventually rebound. But if we cover over every square inch of green space in the name of economic development that land is lost forever.
By Marie on November 26, 2008 10:09 AM
"Actually the voters of the entire county, through the SOAR initiative, said no to paving over our farmlands. Here in Ventura we also wanted our hills preserved and we said so through the ballot box."
But only when the farm is a farm..... Like the Hansen Trust land that really isn't a farm except it has been used as a farm for decades.
"Our economy will eventually rebound. But if we cover over every square inch of green space in the name of economic development that land is lost forever."
I never suggested covering over every square inch of green space in the name of economic development.
I have always suggested that business owners who are ready to start business NOW should be allowed to provided the space they are occupying is compatible. And how much more compatible can an old gas station be with an oil change place.
We need revenue!
The Hansen Trust land was not under SOAR's protection. I was just pointing out to you that the land use decisions you spoke of in regard to "acres and acres of land" were made by the voters.
Have a good Thanksgiving.
To the average, normal person a farm is a farm. When The Hansen Land was pegged for development all of the sudden it isn't a farm anymore because it was never zoned as a farm. This is why the average, normal person probably doesn't trust government. When the SOAR inititive was sold to us we were told that we would be Saving Our Agricultural Resources. If I remember correctly that was what SOAR stood for.
Now we're being told that what it really meant was Saving Our Agricultural Resources (that are actually zoned as Agricultural Resources no matter how land is used).
SOARTAAZAARNMHLIU
Happy Thanksgiving
The SOAR initiative was sold to us by the citizen's group which also wrote it. The measure only included lands which were zoned for agricultural use at the time of the vote, I believe.
There is another large parcel of land near the Hansen Trust property which does not fall under SOAR's purview. It will be the Parklands housing development.
When we go to the ballot box and vote on these initiatives they then become our laws. They are written by citizens, not government staffers or our elected lawmakers. This is true of the anti-big box measure and the VCORD measure which we will be voting on next year.
...what are they waiting for....start laying off city workers now.....what these sneaky politicos usually do is start an early retirement program for city workers....where workers can retire at age 45 with a good pension, and then they hire replacement workers at a lower rate....and they call that cost cutting
Nice piece of fiction but that hasn't been the case in Ventura.
The City could move the discussion beyond a mere “taxes v. cuts� analysis without incurring debt by “monetizing� non-core (as opposed to strategic) assets. For example, Ventura receives rent from wireless carriers for dozens of telecommunications (“cell�) sites. Aggregate site rent is likely to run into hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. The City could sell 20-30 years of these rent receivables for $100,000-120,000 per site. 10 such deals could prevent all 20-30 layoffs discussed above – by selling income streams few are even aware of. Cities that think proactively and creatively will stand out in this recession.