Mayor Bill Finch and police union leadership have reached a tentative agreement on a new labor contract. This is a major breakthrough for city finances and job security if passed by the rank and file. See Finch news release below:
City, Police Union Reach Tentative Deal
BRIDGEPORT, CT (November 22, 2008) – Bridgeport Police Union Local 1159 and the City have reached a tentative agreement which, if approved by the union membership, will keep all 423 police officers on the force.
Details of the agreement must be circulated to the entire union membership and a vote to accept or reject will be held Dec. 1.
“This agreement, if ratified by the union, will provide the city with the savings it needs for the next two fiscal years, while preserving public safety,” said Mayor Bill Finch.
“We’re pleased with the results of our negotiations, and the Union Executive Board will take an active role in rallying the membership to ratify the contract when it comes to a vote on Dec.1,” Frank Cuccaro, Police Union president said.
The Mayor will be submitting the tentative agreement to the City Council at its Dec. 1 meeting for referral to the Contracts Committee. The vote of the full City Council may be taken at the Dec. 15 meeting.
Financial highlights of the deal include: zero-percent raises for the next two years, followed by raises in the later years of the four-year deal; take-home vehicles are to be eliminated at the discretion of the police chief; holiday and vacation time payments will not be paid in the current fiscal year; and a rescinding of the layoffs of nine police officers.
In addition, to the significant value of zero-percent salary increases for two straight years, the city will save approximately $800,000 in the current budget year.
Also, the city will allow the chief to implement his new personnel deployment plan in order to achieve overtime savings.
Talking To Myself
Memo to me:
Thank Park City Fan for sharing budget numbers of increased city spending in prior post.
Check in with union officials to find out when the rank and file will vote on city contract proposals.
Ask Abby Normal if she’s any relation to Dear Abby.
Remind OIB readers to begin posting their Turkey of the Year nominations.
Skunk out the rumors of potential challengers to Probate Judge Paul Ganim.
Get off my butt and do a new Pol Pod.
Find out why Yahooy and Anna have been so quiet. Does this mean they’re hanging out again?
Buy my wife Mo a few kittens for Christmas to grow big and strong to wipe out the surplus woodpecker population eating us out of house and home.
Purchase a blow-up version of Batwoman to entice that damn bat out of the crawl space.
Remind Mo that it’s that time of year when I get to watch my favorite Christmas movie–Die Hard, second only to my favorite Halloween film Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.
Speaking of Frankenstein, that is the city budget, any hope for developments such as Steelpointe and Canyon Johnson to really happen?
Get an update about that Jewish Home for the Elderly plan in Monroe to pipe into the Trumbull line piped into the city’s sewage treatment systems. There’s lots of dough in that doo.
Word is that Tom McCarthy is looking at this job if Ganim leaves. McCarthy is a lawyer and one of Finch’s main supporters on the council. McCarthy is also close to Stafstrom and Testa.
I guess I’ll give it another shot … and Len there is no need to thank me for posting the numbers. I just felt that it is things like this that people need to be made aware of. To date I haven’t heard of any potential layoffs from any of these administrative positions in city hall … just how charitable they have been in their willingness to take a week’s furlough. I thinkthe furlough week works out to about $2,300 hundred bucks for Mayor Finch or roughly 1.5% of his annual take … pales in comparison to what he is asking union members to give up. Once again I’ll put up some budget numbers …
Mayor’s Office
2005 Actual $551,592
2006 Actual $585,587
2007 Actual $611,900
2008 Current $633,850
From budget years 2005-2008 there is a 15% increase
Finance Department
2005 Actual $287,822
2006 Actual $320,956
2007 Actual $352,197
2008 Current $382,139
From budget years 2005-2008 a 32.7% increase
Legislative Budget (City Council)
2005 Actual $122,268
2006 Actual $165,466
2007 Actual $189,103
2008 Current $335,436
from budget years 2005-2008 this is a 174% increase
Office of Policy and Management
2005 Actual $327,601
2006 Actual $386,416
2007 Actual $380,238
2008 Current $441,766
from years 2005-2008 a 35% increase
Chief Admin. Office
2005 Actual $189,585
2006 Actual $229,254
2007 Actual $254,433
2008 Current $273,562
from years 2005-2008 this is a 45% increase
In comparison …
Police Dept.
2005 Actual $40,481,287
2006 Actual $41,300,825
2007 Actual $42,327,558
2008 Current $43,158,843
From years 2005-2008 there is a 7% increase
Fire department
2005 Actual $23,268,708
2006 Actual $22,313,489
2007 Actual $21,549,539
2008 Current $24,158,843
from years 2005-2008 this is a 3% increase
This is just an attempt to illustrate what I believe to be part of the problem. Any reasonable person can see a pattern.
I am a big park city fan.
park city fan:
Hmmm … amazing the story that numbers can tell!
Too bad it’s a story of administrative bloat, misplaced priorities, poor fiscal management and an inability to allocate scarce resources for maximum benefit to the taxpayers and residents of Bridgeport.
It doesn’t take much to uncover opportunities for change in the way the city is run. All it takes is the INTELLIGENT application of objective, fact-based analysis. The evidence will speak for itself.
Keep it up park city fan!
Bruce:
Thank you for acknowledging the effort. I guess the point which I was trying to illustrate is that there is no accountability on the administrative end of this whole mess. I can’t help but draw paralells to what is currently going on in the private sector with hefty bailout packages being doled out to companies whose upper level management are still raking in obscene bonuses on top of their already obscene salaries. Where the hell is the accountability?
Well – it’s one thing to constantly feel abused and neglected, but another to see the numbers.
Not only should this be upsetting to Labor, but it should be upsetting to Taxpayers who are paying a premium in taxes, but getting strained and neglected services in return.
Maybe the Connecticut Post should bring some of this to light. I’d be interested in hearing the Administration’s spin on it.
Nice job, park city fan.
Wow! There is no way the police or fire departments should be shouldering responsibility for deficit balancing if these figures are correct. Is this info from reading the past and current budgets?
The admin’s “spin” is “deny and defend!”
Good mornin’ all … so they want us to take 0% raises … cut OT … but job security … why does my mind keep wanderin’ to the Supt of schools and the suits on that side that got such nice raises a month or so back … why … why … why … and do let me say this … the mayor is doing the dirty work that has to be done in this rough and tumble time, and he really does seem to not want anyone to lose their jobs … just my opinion.
park city fan:
Your Budgetary numbers are misleading. Any reasonable person (ahem) knows that lower numbers mean higher gains and thus provide fertile ground for those who wish to mislead the OIB blogosphere–it’s mathematical.
Here’s the pattern: in dollar amounts–and isn’t that what it’s all about–the increases for the police and fire departments are HIGHER than the four administrative offices you listed. That’s by contractual decree and might not include overtime. If logic were a bowling alley, you’d be a gutterball. It only took two posts but I hereby nominate you–park city fan–for Turkey of the Year.
(gobble, gobble).
Another thought … if little Joe were still the mayor (and remember he put Marsilio and Sullivan into the BOE to steal their monies) would everyone be on him like they are Finch in these troubled times??? … and how about Johnny Fabs … if he was still in office and was forced to make cuts or ask for concessions … would he be under the gun like Finchy??? Just wonderin’.
I am not sure that Ganim or Fabrizi would have been under this much criticism. However this criticism is Finch’s own fault.
I think that if he did not make that campaign pledge for $600 reduction in taxes he may have averted a lot of the criticism.
That $600 started the ball rolling and then all of the waffling on layoffs. Do I lay off school nurses? Do I lay off librarians and the like also contributed to a lot of the criticism.
If he would have started out by telling us exactly what we are in the hole for people would have had a better understanding. BTW does anyone know exactly how much we are in the hole for?
If Finch would have met with the unions earlier like he just did maybe it would have been different.
Finch still faces more criticism as he has not taken steps to show the pain is felt all across the board. He must lay off one or two of his staff. He must do away with some of the political jobs he created such as the new department headed by John Gomes. He can still come out of this looking pretty good if he will make the hard choices listed above. He must also get the take-home car situation under control.
He must build a consensus with all of the common council members not just a few that kiss his butt. The council and the mayor have to work together.
Finch also needs to be honest or maybe a better word is forthright with the public as we can handle it, all we need is the truth. Time will tell.
Good program on PBS Channel 13 this evening at 10:00 pm. It’s about leadership and includes “Hugging Your Customer” guru Jack Mitchell of Mitchell’s in Westport.
on # 12 … remember when Weiker said … there will be no income tax if I am governor … 2 days after elected CT got nailed.
Yes I do remember. This time it’s Finch saying it. The problem is they think we are dumb and will forget.
Local Eyes:
Turkey of the Year award for park city fan?
Seems like the wrong reward for a simple reporting of budget data and percentage rates of change.
Assuming the numbers are right, park city fan just brought transparency to the city’s puzzling world of budgets and spending. Percent change and comparison of total dollar expenditures are BOTH essential for accurate analysis and rationalizing conflicting priorities. Where do you spend the next available dollar … safety and security (fire and police) or improvements in the administrative work that gets done in city hall? The important question is what benefits or savings will the spending produce … and is the city better off as a result.
You’re right to point out that the real dollars reside in police, fire and education budgets. Size does make a difference. Improve operations there and you get real bang for the buck.
But the Mayor needs to find savings in every department of the city … and then prioritize how to allocate (invest) the shrinking flow of taxpayer dollars. Not a trivial task in today’s environment. So if someone spotlights an area where the city MIGHT make money or save money, why not salute them? And save the turkey award for someone much more deserving.
Bruce: I appreciate your coming to my defense on this matter. I too understand that both the percentage changes and the actual dollar amounts need to be looked at. Anyway, it is clear to me that you see the problems with these numbers and I am sure most everyone else does too.
Local Eyes: I think you missed the point of my post. There was no intent to mislead or deceive anyone, the numbers are what they are. I did not make them up or pull them out of thin air. They are posted on the city website for everyone to see … and yes, these are the right figures. As for your insults … well I’ve been called worse by better people … lol.
FYI, heard from a reliable source, Health Net will be going Chapter 11 sometime next week. This should be interesting.
Meatball:
I had heard similar rumors. Also heard of possible buyout by United Health and significant layoffs. Either way it’s not good news.