The City Council’s Budget and Appropriations Committee Tuesday night, with roughly 80 people in attendance, conducted the last of its public hearings in City Hall as the city’s budget-making committee prepares to vote on Mayor Bill Finch’s proposed $520 million spending plan before it goes to a full vote of the city’s legislative body next week. From Brian Lockhart, CT Post:
“Do you realize what you have done to us? Your people are broken,” testified Bill Pelletier, whose property taxes for his home in the city’s Black Rock neighborhood have ballooned from $6,000 to $36,000 in 18 years. “You want more. There is no more … Leave this meeting tonight and hand this budget back to (Mayor) Bill Finch.”
Full story here.
Public hearing statement from Black Rock resident David Walker, former U.S. Comptroller General.
I have three key points that I would like to make. First and foremost, the final budget should not result in a tax increase. Second, the B+A Committee and the Council should cut the Mayor’s proposed spending plan by the amount necessary to avoid ANY tax increase. Third, City employees who are on the City Council have a clear conflict that requires them to recuse themselves from any and all discussions and activities that could affect them, either directly or indirectly, including in connection with their current or deferred compensation.
It has become clear from the public hearings and various Town Hall meetings in recent weeks that a vast majority of the citizens of Bridgeport strongly oppose ANY tax increase. Bridgeport is already one of the highest taxed cities in America. Higher taxes will serve to raise rents, reduce property values, and further harm the ability of Bridgeport to attract and retain both businesses and people. In addition, despite his re-election campaign promise to “hold the line on taxes,” Mayor Finch previously proposed and this Council approved a tax increase last year. This tax increase was inappropriately used, in part, to fund pay raises for the Mayor and a number of top city managers.
Looking ahead, the 2013 scheduled property reassessment will likely result in a significant decrease in assessed values and a corresponding significant increase in the mil rate and effective property tax rate next year. Given all these facts, it’s time for this Council to draw a line in the sand, help the City, represent your constituents, protect the taxpayers, and hold Mayor Finch accountable for his re-election promise.
Since the first public hearing on the budget, the state has pledged to restore most of its previously planned budget cuts to the City. That’s good news. Now it’s time for the B&A Committee and the City Council to do its job and cut the Mayor’s proposed spending plan by the amount necessary to avoid ANY tax increase. I and others have provided plenty of ideas regarding how to do so. In this regard, I would like to enter into the record the memo that was the basis for my prior testimony and which was provided several weeks ago to several Council members, including the co-chairs of the B&A Committee and the Council President.
Tonight I have two more ideas for you. Now that it is clear that the Affordable Care Act will be implemented in 2014, the City should move to have all its retirees covered under the related exchanges and make a contribution towards their individual premium. This could save the City millions in the short-term and hundreds of millions over time. In addition, if the City is providing the $3.3 million in additional required funding to the Board of Education (BOE) in the form of in-kind services with at least that much value, why can’t the City provide the cash and enter into a contract with the BOE that would reimburse the City for the related services?
I would respectfully suggest that you identify specific spending cuts that should be made. To the extent that you can’t do so, you should reduce proposed compensation costs and instruct the Mayor to do what it takes to achieve the required cuts. This should include conducting rotating furloughs of appropriate personnel, including the Mayor and top staff, as and if necessary. The federal government and many state and local governments are already conducting furloughs and Bridgeport should do the same if it proves necessary in order to avoid another tax increase.
The first key step is for the B&A Committee to recommend a budget to the full City Council that meets the first two criteria. This will be a clear and simple litmus test of whether the B&A Committee members have done an effective job for the taxpayers and their constituents.
Fortunately, the B&A Committee does not have any City employees among its members. Therefore, its members do not have an inherent conflict when it comes to employee compensation matters. Hopefully, City employees have not tried to influence the B&A Committee since doing so would represent both an ethical breach and a violation of Chapter 5, Section 5 (f)(1) of the City Charter. That provision and basic ethics rules require that any City employees who are on the Council to recuse themselves from any and all discussions regarding compensation and other matters that could have a direct or special pecuniary impact on them. As they and the City’s Legal Counsel should know, recusal goes far beyond not voting on a matter. It means not being in the room when such matters are considered and not engaging in any discussions or communications whatsoever with other Council members regarding related matters at any time.
Bridgeport is at a critical crossroads in its history. It can either constrain spending, avoid a tax increase, and commit to grow the tax base faster than the City budget–or it can continue to fail to make the tough choices on spending, increase taxpayer burdens year after year, reduce its ability to attract and retain new businesses and residents, and eventually enter Bankruptcy Court. This year’s B&A Committee recommendation and the resulting City Council decisions on the budget will send a clear signal regarding which path current City of Bridgeport elected officials plan to take. With all due respect, raising taxes last year was a mistake. You should not make the same mistake two years in a row.
In closing, the B&A Committee and the full Council should cut the Mayor’s proposed spending plan by the amount necessary to avoid ANY tax increase. In addition, City employees must recuse themselves from any and all discussions and activities that could affect them.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak this evening. And thank you for your efforts on the City budget.
Lennie,
There was unanimous opposition to ANY tax increase tonight and turnout was much better than normal. The City is at a tipping point and the people are fed up. It’s time for the Council to cut spending and hold the line on taxes. Thereafter, we need to take steps to grow the tax base faster than the City budget so tax burdens can be reduced over time. If this Mayor and Council can’t do it, we need to elect people who can and will do it. Specifically, we need people who have the ability, integrity and courage to make the kind of transformational changes it will take to create a better future.
Not only was there unanimous opposition to any tax increase, there were residents from every part of the city. Upper East Side called out failed promises of Finch ($600 to every taxpayer–lots of laughs there) and Curwen (no new taxes–no laughs, just groans) and Marella (just where do you live), East End (from Newton, be your own person and also from Coviello, property taxes raise rents for tenants), East Side (Angel Reyes and the cost to business), North End (husband spoke of watching the Mayor give raises, sees no layoffs while he and his wife face layoffs, no raises and taxes they can’t pay), from Black Rock, Mark Delmonico and Jennifer Buchanan amongst others on the chill to real estate values and sales, John Marchall Lee on transparency and accountability, former State Senator Ed Gomes, M. Evette Brantley, Eva Canales, Bob Halstead and so many others. One single message–do not raise taxes. Period.
Concerning David Walker suggestions, there are a number of items he has listed that are contractual and cannot be changed.
I have to say Mr. Walker brings up many valid points. It’s good this is being discussed. What’s bad is there are too many people criticizing his statement. It’s about time to stand up and do something. Bill Finch is taxing this city into the ground. Real estate values are bubbling under. The only groundbreaking was for the fuel cell plant. There’s a sausage factory coming in, but that will only create a limited number of jobs because the owner is going to retain his existing employees. And all that goes on here on this blog is arguing, bickering, joking around, etc. Stop picking nits. It’s easy to sit on your fat ass, staring into a computer monitor. Stand up and DO SOMETHING. Stop arguing about contractual obligations and other bullshit. Pettiness is not an option anymore. Neither is complacency.
The Bridgeport Kid,
Right on!
Ron,
Are you a lawyer? Do you have a conflict on these issues? For the benefit of the readers of OIB, the answers are “No” and “Yes,” respectively. Most of my suggestions are not contractual. Those that are either need to be re-negotiated or will eventually be handled in Bankruptcy Court.
David Walker, and for the benefit of the readers of OIB, I have negotiated more firefighter contracts than David Walker has, in fact that is why I know what is contractual.
These contracts have no sound funding plan and cannot be sustained and will cause the city to either go bankrupt or tax the homeowners so deeply we will surely fail. You’re proud of this?
Neither are you, Walker … many of the people at this meeting have sincere feelings about taxes and city services … yours seems to be the agenda of Pete Peterson to destroy labor unions.
Hey BRG–how are things in AZ?
BRG,
Go away. You don’t live in Bridgeport anymore! What related credentials do you have? I have a significant amount of compensation, benefits, health care and related experience. For example, I was U.S. Assistant Secretary of Labor for ERISA and former head of the PBGC. I also ran a global consulting practice that included these areas. By the way, under federal law, unions don’t represent retirees and retiree health care benefits do not vest an can be cut or eliminated.
I didn’t realize I was such celebrity with the Kaffee Klatchers … I haven’t even been gone that long … but worry not I will continue to be a thorn in the side of Finch and the machine as well as the Klatchers.
And how will you manage to do that, Dave Moore?
You were never a celebrity, more like a lousy case of poison ivy. Tempted to scratch it, but knowing it would make things worse. Spouting your own toxic opinions with little fact base.
Maybe the desert environment will be suitable soil for you to sink new roots. Of course if you continue to use your Bridgeport “charm” it may be difficult for you to establish sociable relationships. And thereby be doomed to keep checking out OIB and the KK at Harborview. Sending you a big wave, Dave! Maybe we can remember you a little more fondly, by creating a BRG “award.” Looking for folks to create the criteria for such an award. Not so sure anyone would wish to come to the “Award” ceremony. Time will tell.
Hey BRG. Sorry to hear you are not around here anymore. Hope the lack of massage parlors did not chase you away.
All, is that the best you can do? Unlike you I think kids getting shot all the time was a more important problem than the fact you might have to walk past businesses that for the most part were so discreet, long-time residents forgot they existed.
And ALL, if you want to bash me for expressing a viewpoint that street violence should receive a higher priority than closing down massage parlors, then I feel sorry for you.
And BTW JML, I am finding most of the people I have met here have been quite friendly and welcoming. Anyone who disagrees with you is accused of being toxic, and I am quite proud of my Bridgeport charm and of the fact even though I was raised in the suburbs, it came to be my home. The way you use “Bridgeport charm” you make it sound like there is something wrong with being from the Port. I am quite proud of being from Bridgeport even with all the problems.
Right. Sure. You were so concerned about the kids. Just make sure you don’t rub up against too many cacti out there. That could leave a nasty rash.
The public-sector labor union leaders seem to be doing a pretty good job of being on the path of destroying themselves–they ask their members to accept less pay in exchange for better retirement plans, which is proving to be non sustainable, and once the union members are retired, they have no representation and no protection if the cities are bankrupt and restructure all benefits. With 12% of CT citizens as union members and the private unions receive about 70% of most CT city and town budgets, one can understand why many people are seen as anti union. I do not think this is the case but the reality is union management is not doing their members or the taxpayers any justice. I don’t pretend to know the answers, but the course CT and especially Bridgeport is on is a no-win for union members and taxpayers, so who is benefiting from these budgets and tax revenue? I have a friend who is a retired United Air Lines pilot. Two years into his retirement, United filed for chapter (insert number) and the pension fund was raided, leaving a 40-year retired employee working at a golf course to make ends meet. I do not want to see this happen to anyone, but major changes must start now or I fear this will be the future of many union members.
Cool!
“Transformational” is my favorite new term. We live in transformational times whether we like it or not. However, the checks and balances of our democratic system will not allow for the kind of changes Mr. Walker proposes. This is a budget process. not an austerity lovefest. His plan would require too many votes. It would require the kind of disruptive politics we’ve never seen before.
Local Eyes,
How are things in Trumbull? You don’t even live in Bridgeport. Do us all a favor: crawl back into the liquor bottle.
Here’s a place where you will never see The Bridgeport Kid:
www .coolestdudeinbridgeport.com
Local Eyes,
You either make transformational changes or you end up in Bankruptcy Court. The numbers don’t lie and it’s not rocket science. You may just not know what real leadership looks like and what a difference it can make.
Mr. Walker, you have some good ideas but please don’t suggest employees take furloughs. Been there, done that. Then Mayor Finch took the savings achieved through give-backs and gave increases to his staff and created new positions (not in the approved budget) for his cronies. The problem is the Mayor, his budget director and his rubber-stamp City Council–not the employees.
Fixer,
I agree, the Mayor and management are primarily responsible but furloughs are the appropriate action if, and only if, the Mayor and Council can’t agree on other cuts. Taxes must not be raised again. The Mayor’s staff should be cut and he and his staff should be subject to furloughs too.
If this is the beginning of a leadership challenge, I accept.
Glass-Steagall was my favorite law in the history of politics!
Local Eyes,
There will be a leadership challenge. The taxpayers of this city have had enough. That was clear at last evening’s Public Hearing.
Been there and done that with furloughs. If we are short shifted there might not be any Police/Fire coverage in Black Rock. I don’t work all night to watch my pay go to cushy jobs of the friends of.
Dave Walker, I’m sorry but I’m sure I didn’t read this right so would you correct it. You said you have lived in Bridgeport for 3 years, so I know that must be wrong so please tell us how long you have lived in Bridgeport.
Ron,
You read correctly. I have now lived in Bridgeport for over three years but this isn’t really relevant to the points I am making. I have over 40 years of professional experience and have studied Bridgeport’s finances, City Charter, governance structure and other matters more than a vast majority of people in the City. Ignorance and apathy of the challenges we face are a toxic mix. You may have been in Bridgeport longer than me but that does not make you more knowledgeable of relevant issues. By the way, do you live in Bridgeport? Are you happy with the current state of affairs?
Dave, I was born and raised in Bridgeport, attended schools and worked in Bridgeport my whole life, and I still live in Bridgeport. I love my City. I have done battle with every Bridgeport mayor since Tom Bucci, just ask them. I’m no Johnny come lately to the fight here in Bridgeport, but you are. In cutting the budget you do like Willed Sutton said, (the famous bank robber) you “go where the money is” and the money here is in the paychecks of fire and police who put their lives on the line every day. So Dave, how many fire and police contracts in Bridgeport have you ever read you can make cuts?
Ron,
I don’t have time to debate you. By your own admission you obviously have a clear conflict of interest on this issue and are not open minded. The bottom line is there is plenty of room to cut spending in this City and budgets aren’t just about the fire and police departments. That’s a local scare tactic that is old, tired and grossly misleading. Nonetheless, there are too many overhead people and excessive overtime. Why doesn’t the police department use flagmen like many other cities? In addition, current retiree health care benefits are outrageous, unaffordable and unsustainable. They are also being abused since some people who are receiving them are working elsewhere and should receive benefits from their current employer and not the City. That’s enough.
Dave, I know you don’t want to debate me, all you want to do is to make statements unchallenged and to cut health benefits, you give other small items but you are on a trip to eliminate retired workers benefits, that’s the one-trick pony you are riding.
I don’t believe retired workers benefits should be eliminated but they certainly could be reduced to a more reasonable level, say the kind of retirement benefits available to the people paying for those retired workers now. The way things are going, the city could be headed for a bankruptcy and then every pension obligation could be disavowed which would be much worse for the retirees.
Sheepthrills,
I am not suggesting retiree health care benefits be eliminated. I am suggesting they be restructured. If the City ends up in Bankruptcy Court, they will likely be eliminated. We should be able to preserve pension benefits but there are abuses that need to be addressed and eliminated.
Dave, I know you weren’t suggesting eliminating retiree benefits. I agree with you on the subject of renegotiation. I was trying to explain to Mr. Mackey intransigence on this subject is more likely to lead to an unfavorable outcome.
Sheepthrills,
I agree and I think Jennifer’s comment above hits the nail on the head. Government pensions and retiree health benefits are not insured. I used to head the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and have seen first hand what irresponsible union contracts and incompetent management can lead to. It’s an ugly end game. Let’s face facts and start to restructure now.
Ron,
I don’t debate people who helped create part of the problem and don’t want to be part of the solution. You have obviously not read the long list of items I suggested. Do you ever show up at public hearings or Council meetings and try to be part of the solution? Where is your list of items? How much money do they involve? The truth is, based on your comments to date, you’re the one-trick pony and the City is headed to the glue factory (Bankruptcy Court) unless things change and soon.
Dave, post your list so we all can see.
Dave, once again you give no details, you speak in general. You talk about abuse, let’s start from the beginning until now with Pension Plan “A.” Those employees having been paying 8% of their pay towards their pension but the City placed ALL of that money into the City’s general fund. How do you solve that abuse that was done to those employees?
Ron,
If people paid 8 percent of their pay towards their pension and it did not go into the pension trust fund then there are a number of people who should be going to jail! That would be a flagrant fiduciary breach. Did you negotiate that deal?
Ron,
OIB posted it yesterday. OIB may have taken it down and added my new testimony but it’s OK with me if Lennie re-posts it. By the way, where’s your list? Ron, get the message, the City budget is not all about the police and firefighters. You are conflicted!
Dave Walker, as you see your list is not posted. Like I said, in cutting the budget you do like Willed Sutton said, (the famous bank robber), you ‘go where the money is’ and the money here is in the paychecks of fire and police. Now you tell me where’s the money?
Ron,
You don’t do your homework. I will not respond to you again until you review the archives and my list and come up with one of your own that is at least as long. As I said before, you are conflicted and are acting like part of the problem rather than part of the solution. You also don’t answer questions. You asserted a serious fiduciary breach that should result in jail time for the responsible people and you have no comment?! Did you have any role in that arrangement?
Dave Walker, I asked you a question about Pension Plan “A” and those employees having been paying 8% of their pay towards their pension and abuse and you cannot answer that question. I asked you to post your suggestion for budget cuts and your reply is for me to go and find it. One would think if you are so proud of your suggestions you would be glad to post them.
Ron,
You have talked enough this morning to provide evidence you are indeed ‘a one-trick pony.’ You are a retired firefighter entitled to retirement income from Pension Plan A and healthcare benefits under the self-insured and pay. As a retired employee you have no representation of your interests outside of yourself and others in the same position. The City employees on the Plan A Board do not talk about the retirees in any meeting I have attended. The Mayor talks about investments that produce high returns (but may have other risks attached). The others are silent. See their minutes that are kept in the City Clerk’s office if you doubt me.
Andy Fardy, my organizing partner in Budget Oversight Bridgeport (BOB) is also a Pension A retiree with OPEB as well as a taxpayer. He is not ‘a one-trick pony.’ He is concerned about his retirement benefits certainly. Perhaps that is why our initial digging into Pension A and the burden of Pension Obligation Bonds brought us together. The point is we currently look high and low at all City finance matters. You do not. Dave Walker has posted suggestions previously. Did you miss them? Look them up in the archives. You are retired and have the time. Walker and others are working and volunteering in this effort.
Walker asked you to show your ideas. That’s a fair question at this moment. I’ve seen two or three lists he has offered. I have heard nothing from you that is on topic, except tough talk on your own interest.
When ships go down, how sure are you that you are protected by a life raft or personal flotation device? If the unions and Federal Law have left you “no place at the table” why don’t you create a “new place at the table” by contributing to the effort to transform the status quo and the structures that maintain it? Time will tell.
John Marshall Lee, so now you are the spokesman for Dave Walker and you are going to tell me “You have talked enough this morning to provide evidence you are indeed a one-trick pony.” JML, you are talking to the wrong person here.
Mr. Walker needs no spokesperson. But you need to post some of your ideas if folks are going to provide your writing with any credibility going forward. It’s OK, even necessary, for you to want to protect your position.
But when you want to be in the community debate, where are your ideas? Still in a defensive circle? You were trained as a fire fighter … how do you protect the property of all of your neighbors … not by staying at home worried about your own home. Let’s get some of your water on this fiscal fire. Time will tell.
John Marshall Lee, you should know better than anyone else there are no magical solutions to the City’s budget and even if there were we don’t know if this mayor and city council would take. I read David Walker’s suggestions when they were first posted but Lennie instead replaced it with a statement that Walker put out with this topic. I challenged some of those suggestions because there is no need to list items that cannot be changed because of on-going contracts.
I totally agree that lack of leadership by this mayor and city council must change and any tax increase must be stopped. I agree with most of your suggestions but they are not going to accepted by the mayor. There are times when you know what is being put on the table will not help.
For the past two years and again this year, a start towards “magical solutions” would be the elimination of all vacant positions. We would be $10 Million or so ahead had the City Council done that. Instead, money funded all types of silliness for which the Council cannot account.
There are Council members who have asked for a FINAL, not DRAFT, version of the June 2012 monthly report. It has not been provided to them. Only with that document can you see where the money budgeted for Line Item 51000 Full Time Compensation was really spent.
You can call it magic, but once you get on this trail, there is more. How many years do we have to announce it to the City Council and see them fail to act on it? So what if the Mayor will not accept them. Profound confidence in his path will lead him more rapidly to his downfall than were he courteous (to UB national champs, those who oppose his ways, etc.), confident and conversational. The man is afraid for himself and his team. They are running out of money, our money, and they are showing panic. Does Mayor Finch want his name on a civic building in the future? It will have to be green of course. Built by union contractors. Be part of a park, maybe, or as a result of a purchase of taxable property for a high price the city cannot realize if it attempted to re=sell it? Maybe some public rest room facilities that use no water as state of the art recycling units and located at the public dump, to remind folks on how low he brought the City of Bridgeport. As I have recalled before, the title of Richard Fariña’s 1966 book could be placed on the entrance, BEEN DOWN SO LONG, IT LOOKS LIKE UP TO ME. A contrarian outlook, certainly. Another segment of public relief? Time will tell.
*** Many of the upcoming future contracts with all the city unions need to be re-assessed due to “unrealistic overassumed revenues” in the near future. All nonessential political jobs need to be cut or laid off! Every city dept starting with the Mayor’s office and admin needs to be cut 10% across the board as well and ghost positions eliminated just to start. Then maybe the B&A committee can consider a tax and mil rate increase, no? *** IT’S NOT PRETTY AND THERE’S NO MAGIC CITY BUDGET! ***
In cutting City jobs you need to target certain positions and not just a straight 10% or whatever percentage across the board. The police and fire department should get rid of the positions of deputy chiefs, the are real high-paying positions both departments can do without.
OMG. There you have it. When people are the beneficiaries of benefits they do not even want to discuss compromise. One thing is certain, the city and the country cannot continue on this road. Bankruptcy, well there is an option many cities across the country are considering. We have been there, done that and failed. Ask Mayor Mary Moran. She was the last Republican Mayor this city will ever see as well as the first woman elected to that post and sadly, more or less forgotten. Unions ultimately will lose support of the public and slowly dissolve across the country. Pensions will be renegotiated or most likely dissolved. It is just a natural evolution. The city just cannot afford this anymore.
Does anyone know when the state PILOT decision will be announced? My question is, the city budget is passed on the assumption of none of the 4 State programs being restored, about 10 million as I recall, so when the money is restored, what will the city do with that money if the budget does not include that income? Or am I missing something?
Ron, your opinions remind me of someone saying “oh my God am I here all alone.” That could very well be and I hope you and others don’t lose their retirement benefits, but in history it has happened in other places, and people have been left “All Alone.” Focus on the 8% contribution monies you put in and it really could be lost. Walker and Lee are your friends. I trust them, they have nothing to lose–you do!
Auden just confirmed state budget is June 30. After our budget is set, and the union must approve furloughs, only 40 employees are non union members. Can I get an amen for REAL Charter reform and an independent finance board with veto power? So the mayor presents a budget city council must cut by 17 million dollars for a 0 tax increase and the reality is the car tax will stay in place and most of the PILOT will be restored. This is beyond the pale of outrageous. We must push for a cap on real estate taxes. This appears to be the best way to reign in government spending.
The only way to really rein in govt spending is make sure the money is being spent wisely. They tried Proposition 8 in California and it was a disaster. Nothing is going to change in B’port if it revolves mainly around the same group of people I have criticized. Hiring good teachers, cops etc. costs money. Want your taxes to be reasonable, then start complaining about Mayor Finch’s so-called economic development policy that revolved around residential real estate development. Torres’ wasn’t that much different. Unless you want to empty out the lower middle class and poor neighborhoods, which I hope most of you would agree is immoral and stupid, stop believing the baloney they won’t come to CT. Many left B’port for neighboring towns. And maybe show the same enthusiasm for ending the violence that afflicts the East End and other neighborhoods you spend trying to close down massage parlors, then just maybe you will win over enough people to bring change to Bridgeport. And don’t fall for this blame the unions and the rank and file city employees. That is the work of people with an agenda that has nothing to do with making B’port a better place for ALL its citizens. And if Walker and JML want to bash me for saying this, go ahead. I really don’t care.
Wrote this early in the morning … they mean high tech and light industry. And you want decent city services … then you need cops and teachers and firefighters and DPW. Don’t pay attention to the people who demonize them as greedy … They work, too … and many put their lives on the line … show some appreciation.
Well I tried to stay out of the pension plan debate, but I can’t. Every administration has gone after the retirees and their benefits in one way or another.
Back when we were working in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s and the city was suffering from crime rates through the roof and 8 firefighters died in the line of duty there were not a lot of people lining up for these jobs. We earned our retirements and went off into the life of retirement with our injuries and our lifetime of pain. All that being said the city bonded on 2 occasions to fund pension plan A and the money was squandered playing the stock market. The retirees had no representative on this board.
The city is doing it again with the new police pension (MERF) by allowing cops to retire with their best 3 years of earnings that INCLUDE OUTSIDE OVERTIME (doing traffic for a hole in the ground). Here are some cost-cutting measures that should save a lot of money:
1. All mayoral appointments and the mayor should take a 10% pay cut.
2. Each department should take a 10% budget cut.
3. Freeze all hiring.
4. Sell the airport as it is losing over $300K per year.
5. Instead of a 36-hole golf course sell off 18 holes.
6. Revamp work rules in all departments which should save on manpower.
7. Eliminate positions in labor relations, city attorney’s office and upper management of public facilities.
8. Stop running two city hall locations.
9. Combine departments where feasible like health & building inspectors under 1 manager.
10. Do away with city-run senior centers, it’s at the point where we take care of people from cradle to grave.
I am sure I missed something.
I don’t agree with everything on Andy’s list, but at least he is making suggestions. That’s more than anyone else is doing. We need more of that and less rhetoric, name calling and loose talk about “bankruptcy.”
Any other suggestions?
Phil Smith, I agree with you but most importantly your comment “less rhetoric, name calling and loose talk about “bankruptcy.” You have stated with very few words what I’ve been fighting about but NOT saying it and that is “loose talk about “bankruptcy,” there has been only one person who brings that subject up on OIB.
Ron,
It’s not loose talk. With all due respect, I know more about government finances than you will ever know. In addition, I have been involved in many bankruptcy cases that were driven largely by underfunded pension plans and unfunded retiree health obligations. I comment based on my independent and objective professional experience and expertise. I don’t have conflicts but you do. By the way, who was responsible for allowing employee contributions to not go into the firefighters’ pension trust fund? You didn’t answer that even though I asked you twice. If it’s true, it’s a civil AND criminal offense. I’d love to pursue justice for those who were harmed.
God Bless you, Andy!
Maybe we should hire a labor contract negotiator who is familiar with arithmetic.
Eliminate Labor Relations or stop paying outside attorneys millions of dollars to do the job of Labor Relations. If you knew the real $$ figure that was spent last year on labor relations cases, you would be shocked and appalled. Finch, Nunn, Wood and Sherwood have made it their top priority to break the unions. Problem is this union busting is costing the taxpayers mucho bucks. This deserves an investigation in itself. Maybe after we get the results of the blizzard investigation. Don’t hold your breath.
Bruce Lee,
The current Administration is breaking the bank and pushing the City towards bankruptcy. They will break the backs of the taxpayers before anything else. It’s time for a change.
How are members of PF and the mayor’s office getting brand-new cars? Have we put this on the credit card too? I thought we were broke. If you can’t afford a new vehicle, you don’t buy one. Wouldn’t that money have been better spent replacing outdated, broken-down PF equipment instead of buying new cars for the chosen few?
Dave Walker, you have no idea of the level of dysfunction. You have no idea how bad it is. I wish you did.
Bruce Lee,
I know enough to see incompetence, irresponsibility and conflicts of interests galore. I know enough to do something to try to change things. More people need to do the same.
Get rid of the damn horse patrol.
Local Eyes’ Rumor Mill:
Ron Mackey was Jimi Hendrix’ guitar technician during his entire but short career! They met while in the Army, became fast friends and were honorably discharged five days apart.
As the festival was closing on Sunday night at Woodstock, it was Ron Mackey who thought they wouldn’t see stage time until Monday morning and suggested he practice and rehearse The Star Spangled Banner, “Jimi style.” He did and the rest is history.
Oh.
Purple Haze.
I have been asked on OIB what were my suggestions concerning the budget here in Bridgeport. I have suggested a number of times I wanted the state to set up a financial review board or a independent financial review. I have listed some past history below I feel can still work:
Bridgeport, Connecticut’s largest city, experienced deep financial difficulties in the 1980s that culminated in takeover action by state authorities. When the Connecticut legislature first addressed the Bridgeport emergency in 1988, the city had a projected cumulative deficit of $60 million, including an anticipated $20 million shortfall for the current fiscal year, 1987-88.
The deficit had accumulated over a decade, with the most immediate causes poor tax collections and overestimates of revenue. The laws the Connecticut legislature passed were Special Acts 88-80, 89-23, 89-47, 90-31, 91-40. The various Bridgeport acts all amend SA 88-80.
• Powers of BFRB
Not more than 30 days after submission of the plan by the city, the board determines whether the plan is complete and complies with the requirements, and approves or disapproves the plan. If the board disapproves the plan the board formulates and adopts a plan that is effective until the board approves a financial plan submitted by the city.
In addition, BFRB is granted a number of other powers:
a. Consult with the city in the preparation of the annual budget and approve the budget and certify to the city general fund budget revenue estimates approved therein.
b. Approve the terms of each proposed long- and short-term borrowing by the city during the emergency period.
c. Adopt regulations regarding its approval of city contracts during emergency period.
d. Review and analyze prior to their approval by the common (city) council, all collective bargaining agreements to determine their financial impact on the current budget and the three-year financial plan.
e. With respect to labor contracts in binding arbitration, at the request of either party, present testimony to the arbitration panel on the impact of the proposed contract provisions on the current year budgets and the three-year financial plan.
f. Review and analyze to determine compliance with the three-year financial plan, all capital fund contracts and all bond ordinances and resolutions of the city involving amounts of over $250,000 and all general fund contracts and water pollution control fund contracts including collective bargaining agreements, which anticipate the appropriation of money in a future budget year of over $100,000 or include termination penalties of over $100,000.
g. BFRB shall from time to time, as it deems necessary:
1. Review the efficiency and productivity of city operations and management and make reports to the finance director and mayor.
2. Audit compliance with the financial plan and for the annual budget.
3. Recommend to the city such measures relating to the efficiency and productivity of the city’s management as the board deems appropriate to reduce costs and improves services. [footnote 2: In January 1991, the board ordered the city to lay off 100 employees unless the city can find other ways to balance its budget. New York Times, January 20, 1991]
4. Obtain information on the financial condition and needs of the city.
h. BFRB shall receive from the city and review such financial statements and projections budgetary data and information as deemed necessary.
i. Inspect, copy and audit books and records as deemed necessary.
j. Monitor monthly reports of the financial condition of the city, the status of the annual budget and progress of the financial plan.
k. Monitor, along with the finance director, the city’s revenues and expenditures.
• Financing powers
The BFRB does not have any power to issue debt on behalf of Bridgeport. However, the state legislation authorized the city to issue bonds supported by intercept revenues (local taxes held by a trustee) for the purpose of funding budget deficits through the period ending June 1988. The legislation also provided a state guarantee for $35 million of these deficit bonds and notes.
Ron,
Thanks for your thoughts. I agree we need a State-appointed Financial Control Board and I have called for such in the past. However, the new Board must have broader powers than the last one, including certain rights with regard to making recommendations in connection with existing contractual arrangements. I have met with a member of the last Bridgeport Financial Review Board who agreed they didn’t have the power to do some things that needed to be done and any new Board must have more power if the City and State want Bridgeport to avoid Bankruptcy Court.
What about having a frequently asked questions (FAQ) set up for this topic?
I do believe a financial review board will bring Bridgeport back to where it financially belongs. It will stop the unnecessary spending and hiring and will call to task people overspending their budgets. Let’s remember 24 departments overspent their budgets in the budget year 2012 – 2013.
Mr. Walker, let’s here more from you on cutting the budget. You are starting to sound like a one-trick pony in regards to gutting retirees benefits. Let me try to answer you on the employee contributions that went into the general fund. Back in 1969 we were paying 5% towards our pensions and it increased to 8% after the 20-year pension. The money always went into the general fund. Whenever we broached the subject of putting the money into a fund we were told No and if memory serves we lost this in binding arbitration. Back then there were approx 1000 cops and firefighters just for an idea because I can’t remember the pay scale let’s say each employee put in $20 towards the pension, that was $20,000 per week that went into the general fund.
Andy,
You should know I have offered two to three pages of ideas already and I have provided them directly to the Council and in writing. That’s plenty. I also have more than a full-time job and travel 50-plus percent of the time. In fact, I’m in Phoenix now and will be headed back on the red-eye tonight. The bottom line is we need elected officials with the ability, integrity and courage to do the right thing. We’ll know soon if we have any or not and how many need to be challenged in November and beyond. Regarding the pension matter, it sounds like a long time ago a number of people breached their fiduciary duties. Has it stopped? If it stopped years ago you may be well beyond the statute of limitations. One thing is for sure, whoever was involved in that did not represent the workers and should be ashamed of themselves.
Somebody break out the hip waders … and I live in AZ so I am not talking about rain.
BRG,
You need hip waders because of the BS you generate and post to this site, and probably others. You aren’t even a resident of Bridgeport. Why don’t you focus on places where you live and can vote? Adios.
*** THE CITY ADMIN, THEIR LEGAL ADVISERS, THE UNIONS, CITY WORKERS AND CITY POLS ARE ALL OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY WHEN DEALING WITH PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE CONTRACTS! IN THE END, CITY TAXPAYERS AND RETIREES WILL ALL SUFFER THE OUTCOME! ***
The easy way out is to blame the retired city employees and the working city employees. Yeah, money shortfall, let’s get them to take furlough days, that will do it. Oh lest I forget the last time the city workers gave back to the city all the big shots gave themselves significant raises.
In the meantime this administration keeps spending like drunken sailors. They keep hiring relatives of city employees and politicians. How about the two new hires in Labor relations one of whom is Sue Brannelly’s brother in law. Why do we need six employees there, after all they only handle employee problems and not contract negotiations. There is no way Tom McCarthy is worth a $100K salary.
The city is still buying new vehicles for upper management. We just hired six unqualified people for public facilities, two at the airport and the list goes on and on.
All the public hears is about pension plan A, very little else. Cut the budget by 10% and there is a savings of $52,000,000, even cut it by 5% and you save $26,000,000.
The pension irregularities are not going to go away. If left in the hands of the current ‘handlers,’ the city is doomed to a painful trip to bankruptcy court. In bankruptcy court these contracts will certainly be restructured. Best case scenarios are to get rid of the omnipresent Calamarian-controlled government and replace it with highly skilled financial analytical types who have the capacity to form a plan that will ensure reasonable pension payments and health care that is properly funded and therefor sustainable. Tough pill for current pensioners to swallow. My wife retired from teaching in 1998. She was promised sweetheart health coverage for life. Zero premium and no deductibles. Virtually no out-of-pocket expenses. Her BOE could not sustain the promise. She now pays a modest premium, has co-pays and deductibles. Her union informed her she is no longer represented pointing out she no longer pays dues. She and her fellow teachers sued and lost. While the arbiter and judge concurred a valid contract was violated, her BOE showed clear real evidence there was no prospect of her community to generate the revenue needed to fund and sustain the original promise. No concessions were established. The retired teachers started to pay and pay and pay. The moral of this story is simple. You cannot get blood from a stone. Bridgeport is already way beyond financial collapse as far as pensions and health benefits are concerned. Dave Walker understands with a clarity that comes from a career in pension analysis. Those who are critical of Walker’s ominous predictions do not.
I think Walker is selling everyone a bill of goods. Take a look at the proposals he has done for the USPS … wants to privatize parts of it … that type of deal rarely works out for employees or the public. The companies doing the privatizing make out like bandits. There are people in private finance who are drooling over cities in distress like B’port. As I said in other posts, in the immortal word of Bela Lugosi … “Bevare.”
See what I mean?
yahooy, yes I do. You can’t fix the intentionally ignorant.