Council resolution to accept 5% paycut

[andy157]

As the Mayor put it, it was because at this point, they don't know how much the cuts will end up being. May be the oft mentioned 12% cut. May be more than 5%, may be less. That was countered with they could change the % amount as needed (also remember this is voluntary and non-binding).

Even with the reservations by some about putting a specific amount in, all present Council voted for it (except for "Skip" Kelly who was strongly opposed)

The Mayors suggestion to omit the 5% figure was nothing less than a cryptic message to Councilman Ryan, which was, we want 12% from the employees, don't box us into a corner with this 5% number. Ryan's zeal to keep his symbolic mission in tact caused him to miss the message. As workman45 stated, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Larry OKC]

The Mayors suggestion to omit the 5% figure was nothing less than a cryptic message to Councilman Ryan, which was, we want 12% from the employees, don't box us into a corner with this 5% number. Ryan's zeal to keep his symbolic mission in tact caused him to miss the message. As workman45 stated, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

I watched it and didn't get that take on it at all. As I said, no one is boxed in with that number. Besides being symbolic and completely non-binding (gosh, where have we heard that before?), they can change it as the real numbers become clear.

[andy157]

I watched it and didn't get that take on it at all. As I said, no one is boxed in with that number. Besides being symbolic and completely non-binding (gosh, where have we heard that before?), they can change it as the real numbers become clear.

You very well may be right, and I could very well be wrong. Your right they can change it if need be. However, I'm guessing if the 12% number changes, even if it goes down, will not fall to or below the 5% contained in the resolution. If I'm correct the Council will be forced to amend the resolution in order to save face which may re-ignite another round of infighting on the horseshoe. We'll have to wait to see.

[LakeEffect]

You very well may be right, and I could very well be wrong. Your right they can change it if need be. However, I'm guessing if the 12% number changes, even if it goes down, will not fall to or below the 5% contained in the resolution. If I'm correct the Council will be forced to amend the resolution in order to save face which may re-ignite another round of infighting on the horseshoe. We'll have to wait to see.

Where did you get the 12% salary cut figure? My understanding was that each department had to submit a 12% budget cut plan, not a simple salary cut plan...

[andy157]

Where did you get the 12% salary cut figure? My understanding was that each department had to submit a 12% budget cut plan, not a simple salary cut plan...

Your absolutly correct, each department was directed to submit a budget for FY/10-11 with a reduction of 12% from the previous year. You are also correct to say the 12% represents a overall reduction, and not a simple 12% cut in wages and benefits.

For me to insinuate the entire 12% would simply come from wages and benefits was incorrect, and a mistake on my part, please accept my apology.

However, as it pertains to the F.D. the Chief is to the point where he will be hard pressed to cut 1 or 2 percent, much less 12 without those cuts coming by way of Personal Expenditures.

The Firefighters whom I have heard from, rightly or wrongly, have been led to believe that there is no where to cut 12% from other than employee cost. So it really comes down to this, we cut "X" number of Firefighters, and wages stay staus quo, or we keep all of you, and cut your wages.

The first option puts the Council in an uneasy situation of supporting the elimination of 140 Firefighters (which IMO violates the intent of the 3/4 cent PSST), leaving them with the more favorable option 2, which is exactly what M&T was hired to do.

Having said all of that, the point you make whereas the 12% is not strictly in wages is valid, but unless there is a big upturn in the economy it will be alot closer to 12 than it will be to 5.

[Mikemarsh51]

Scott Johnson went to Cincinnati. No idea if he is still there.

[Larry OKC]

We have been thru this before...from the City's 03-04 budget report

City of Oklahoma City | Budget Perspective

How deep are the cuts?
The projected budget gap is $12 million. All General Fund departments had to cut budgets. Police and Fire were required to cut 2% of their budgets and the other General Fund departments had to propose budget cuts of 11% – the biggest reductions we've had in years.

How are we going to serve the public?
The best we can. Our budgets are always tight due to employee costs – even when revenues were growing 5% a year. But the level of cuts necessary next year will affect our core services – parks, animal control, street maintenance and public safety. All these services depend on workers.

Why do we have to cut jobs?
About 80% of the General Fund budget goes for employee-related costs. Direct annual costs such as pay and benefits alone account for 68%. Other expenses (ongoing retiree health insurance subsidies for example) increase employee General Fund expenditures to approximately 80%.

Cutting training and office supplies won't close a $12 million gap – we have to cut positions.

[LakeEffect]

Your absolutly correct, each department was directed to submit a budget for FY/10-11 with a reduction of 12% from the previous year. You are also correct to say the 12% represents a overall reduction, and not a simple 12% cut in wages and benefits.

For me to insinuate the entire 12% would simply come from wages and benefits was incorrect, and a mistake on my part, please accept my apology.

However, as it pertains to the F.D. the Chief is to the point where he will be hard pressed to cut 1 or 2 percent, much less 12 without those cuts coming by way of Personal Expenditures.

The Firefighters whom I have heard from, rightly or wrongly, have been led to believe that there is no where to cut 12% from other than employee cost. So it really comes down to this, we cut "X" number of Firefighters, and wages stay staus quo, or we keep all of you, and cut your wages.

The first option puts the Council in an uneasy situation of supporting the elimination of 140 Firefighters (which IMO violates the intent of the 3/4 cent PSST), leaving them with the more favorable option 2, which is exactly what M&T was hired to do.

Having said all of that, the point you make whereas the 12% is not strictly in wages is valid, but unless there is a big upturn in the economy it will be alot closer to 12 than it will be to 5.

It's going to be an interesting next few months. I wonder what will happen when the departments that were able to submit 12% cuts without losing people, or only losing a few, have to reconcile with the larger departments that are down to cutting personnel only. Will all departments have to then take a pay cut, or only those that need the budget space?

The optimist in me sees the upticking sales tax collection (which is trending higher at a slightly faster rate than the Finance Dept. predicted), will be high enough for Council to not have to cut pay... but that's me, always the optimist.

[rcjunkie]

As a retired OKC Management Employee, I keep in touch with several previous employees (Parks Dept.). I'm hearing that a pay reduction will not happen, but that positions will be cut (Parks has already cut 7 that were vacant) and employees may be required to pay a higher percentage for their health benefits.
During recent months, promises were made that no position cuts would be made to Police/Fire, if this does not hold out to be true, I'll be one of the first to attend a council meeting and let my voice (for what it's worth) be heard.

[Mikemarsh51]

From www.City-Sentinel.com 4/5/10

"City Manager Jim Couch Concedes public safety faces pay cuts or layoffs."

Public safety is facing draconian budget cuts. So how does Jim Couch feel about public safety?

“I’m for public safety,” he states plainly. “But the fact is we have a $26 million shortfall for (fiscal) 2010-2011. We spend two thirds of our (city) budget on public safety. You can’t take all the cuts out of the other third.

The public safety sector is in dire straits, he conceded. And he knows of no magic wand the city has that it can wave to make it better.

There was some discussion before the MAPS 3 vote that the city might be able to help plug the hole with the use tax, which taxes people who buy equipment elsewhere and bring it into Oklahoma City and use it here.

However the use tax stands at about $9 million and $2 million of that is already committed elsewhere. The remaining $7 million is far too inadequate to help with the public safety shortfall.

What it will come down to is either is pay and benefit concessions or layoffs, he said. There’s simply no alternative to reach the overall 12 budget cuts the city faces.

“It isn’t brain surgery,” he stated. ”But it is going to be very hard.”

Fire and police representatives have made it clear Oklahoma City citizens’ safety and medical emergencies will suffer if their forces are cut. The police department’s labor union says its ranks are already 277 officers short.

Both departments would take cuts of around 250 personnel if the cuts were to come in the form of layoffs only, they have said.

While not saying so directly, Couch hinted that fire and police compensation cuts might not be quite as painful as their representatives would have the public believe. He said their total compensation is more than the general public realizes. The Tulsa police department recently took about a 5 percent pay cut according to media reports.

In fact, he said police and fire base pay is higher than recent surveys have indicated – in the mid $70s, although he conceded that does include overtime. Firefighters work 24-shifts, automatically kicking in overtime, for example, he said.

When informed that Fraternal Order of Police President Gil Hensley said his members would probably rather seek junior officers laid off rather than take pay or benefit cuts, Couch said, “I’m sorry to hear that.”

Oklahoma City public safety personnel are paid very well compared with regional cities, and even those which are bigger.

Couch said Oklahoma City has a very fine public safety force and is proud of the work they do for the city.

The city’s proposed budget will be presented to the council, and pending its approval, implemented in May.


Seems like I did see TV commercials saying if you pass Maps3 it will put more Police and Firefighters on the street. I'm just saying.......

[metro]

Well I can tell you one thing, there would be even more being laid off if MAPS 3 didn't pass.

[NikonNurse]

Well I can tell you one thing, there would be even more being laid off if MAPS 3 didn't pass.

How do you come to that conclusion?

[Mikemarsh51]

Metro, I don't remember any TV commercials about your statement.

[NikonNurse]

Someone refresh my memory, Wasnt the police/fire argument that the MAPS3 was a matter of bad timing and not a bad idea? The city shortfall was present long before Maps was mentioned and they felt something should be done about the shortfall first before putting money elsewhere?

Or was it they were just being bullies and wanting a raise? I'm not sure which one of those I heard more of. Wait...yes I do.

[metro]

How do you come to that conclusion?

Well for one there would no longer be any use tax to collect, two you would have had lots of young professionals moving out of state if the city didn't cast a vision going forward. A "No" vote on MAPS would have been that the citizens no longer believed in the City's future, thus more tax revenue headed out of state. I know people that are more dedicated like myself probably wouldn't have been as conscious as much about spending my disposable income in OKC proper and not Edmond, Moore and other suburbs, so again even more tax revenue to the suburbs and less to OKC proper. I know many people who make an effort to buy in OKC to get the MAPS coffers up instead of suburbs.

[metro]

Someone refresh my memory, Wasnt the police/fire argument that the MAPS3 was a matter of bad timing and not a bad idea? The city shortfall was present long before Maps was mentioned and they felt something should be done about the shortfall first before putting money elsewhere?

Or was it they were just being bullies and wanting a raise? I'm not sure which one of those I heard more of. Wait...yes I do.

No, they were mad because no money was allocated for police/fire in it. Doesn't make sense to in the first place since it is a temporary tax dedicated to public works projects, not temporary staffing.

[Wambo36]

Someone refresh my memory, Wasnt the police/fire argument that the MAPS3 was a matter of bad timing and not a bad idea? The city shortfall was present long before Maps was mentioned and they felt something should be done about the shortfall first before putting money elsewhere?

Or was it they were just being bullies and wanting a raise? I'm not sure which one of those I heard more of. Wait...yes I do.

Your memory is correct. Although there are those who would have you believe otherwise, since that isn't the version the mayor, the council, the chamber of commerce or the local media put out.

As Mike pointed out above, the good thing is it's recorded forever on youtube. "MAPS will mean more policemen and firefighters for our city." LOL

[fuzzytoad]

No, they were mad because no money was allocated for police/fire in it. Doesn't make sense to in the first place since it is a temporary tax dedicated to public works projects, not temporary staffing.

I've gone thru every single post I can find on this forum, every article and blog I could find about MAPS3 during the time it was being debated and I can't find a single sentence that supports what you just posted.

[Mikemarsh51]

Everyone can spin it how they want to. We as a group of Firefighters saw that is was bad timing. Simple, that's it bad timing. The nation as a whole was/is suffering. It did not feel like the right thing to do.

Metro, your point is absurd! If we as a citizenry had wait 2 years it would not have undone anything. Still we would have had all of the previous projects, still would have Thunder Basketball, still would have had the Redhawks, still would have all the things we enjoy. Wow, wouldnt it have made us look really smart if our council had listened to our budget director who claims he has been informing the council for at least 2 years that tough time were coming.

How in the world are we going to build the 3 new stations the citizens voted for in 2007 if we lay off 100 some odd people?

[metro]

So now you firefighters are experts on public policy and political campaigns? The vote passed hands down so obviously not enough share your concerns.

[Mikemarsh51]

So you got all of that out of the us using some common sense and being able to see the handwriting on the wall that the the budget director could have been on to something.

I would say we did pretty good in that campain, raising issues that directly impact us. We spent $120,000.00 vs. the $3,000,000.00 the other side spent.

You know we predicted this problem, that is why Mayor Cornett started the talk about how Maps3 was going to increase public safety.

[NikonNurse]

So now you firefighters are experts on public policy and political campaigns? The vote passed hands down so obviously not enough share your concerns.

I dont think it passed by a landslide...if that is what you are inferring.
It smelled a little health care reformish to me.

[LordGerald]

So you got all of that out of the us using some common sense and being able to see the handwriting on the wall that the the budget director could have been on to something.

I would say we did pretty good in that campain, raising issues that directly impact us. We spent $120,000.00 vs. the $3,000,000.00 the other side spent.

You know we predicted this problem, that is why Mayor Cornett started the talk about how Maps3 was going to increase public safety.

You predicted nothing. The election had to be held so the tax would be seamless. Don't start imagining that the fire union was trying to warn the public about this "impending" budget crisis. Tax receipts had been going down for nearly two years, so it's not like you guys were clarvoyant.

You didn't become concerned with MAPS 3 until you and your hero buddies were denied your one percent raise.

[andy157]

You predicted nothing. The election had to be held so the tax would be seamless. Don't start imagining that the fire union was trying to warn the public about this "impending" budget crisis. Tax receipts had been going down for nearly two years, so it's not like you guys were clarvoyant.

You didn't become concerned with MAPS 3 until you and your hero buddies were denied your one percent raise.

LG who was denied a 1% raise?

[Wambo36]

You didn't become concerned with MAPS 3 until you and your hero buddies were denied your one percent raise.

That, LG, was one of the biggest loads of BS put out during the campaign. But hey, you stick with what you know or think you know.