LBReport.com

Opinion

City Pays More, Gets Less...And Boasts About It

by Terry Jensen


LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.

(Nov. 27, 2015) -- At the Nov. 17 City Council meeting, Mayor Garcia praised the Council for being "fiscally responsible" and declared that times are "not as bad as a few years ago." These comments set up his disclosure that although the (FY 16) budget "surplus" will evaporate in less than a year, things are getting better because future deficits won't be as bad. Not so, "things" are not getting better and they should know better!

This reminded me of 2006, when Mayor O'Neill and Council member Laura Richardson publicly burned a former budget and declared its budget deficits were over. And in mid-2006, Bob Foster took office after hammering his Council-incumbent runoff opponent for voting for the 2002 pension spike. Foster then, ignoring fiscal restraint, supported pay raises for the city's three major public employee unions without what he now calls pension reforms. When the 2008 recession arrived that many other cities weathered without a "crisis", Foster belatedly advised pension reforms and recommended "proportional reductions" that decimated core services for taxpayers that haven't been restored.

Now it is Garcia's turn to develop a new and fanciful "spin" for our slide into near Third World infrastructure and public service status.

[Scroll down for further]

First let me put an end to the fantasy that we have budget "surpluses." We do not have budget surpluses. In my view you have a budget surplus if and when you are able to fulfill all your essential service and staffing obligations and you have money left over. When revenue, although increasing year after year, is greatly exceeded by the exploding expense obligations you created, what you have is a fiscal CRISIS.

This brings us to Mayor Garcia's words which, I regret to say, don't match fiscal facts and in my view don't support the Pollyannaish notion that times for taxpayers are better or that they will get better any time soon.

I base this on my review of City Budgets and CAFRs ("Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports" required to be filed with Sacramento) that I downloaded from the City's web pages. I started with 2008 (Garcia was elected to the Council in spring 2009) and ended with this year's Garcia-recommended (took office as Mayor mid-July 2014), Council-approved FY 16 budget document. These documents are quite telling.

I first looked at the cornerstone of City Hall's declaration of fiscal responsibility. The immediate past and current Mayors, multiple Council members and city management proudly proclaim they cut almost 700 employees from the city's roster. This invites taxpayers to believe their actions saved the city millions in wages and benefits. But is it true?

While the budgets indicate they "cut" 641 employee "positions," I couldn't find any evidence that annual employee cost had decreased, despite the fact that cutting 641 positions should save the City's taxpayers between $66 and $86 million annually. (3,168.85 FTE in 2008 and 2,527.82 in 2016)

Instead, during this "austerity period," the budgets indicate that total Salaries, Wages and Benefits with 641 FEWER employees actually INCREASED by $16 Million from 2008 to 2016. ($324 Million in 2008 vs $340 Million in 2016.)

Employee cost INCREASED because the Mayors and Councils made spending decisions that let average individual costs per employee to increase by a whopping 32% or $32,258. (Avg. total cost per employee $102,245 in 2008 increased to $134,503 in 2016) I suspect many of the employees "cut" were actually unfilled positions that never had an actual employee in place.

I also noticed that the total number of employees cut differs in the city's Budgets and the CAFR documents. The last posted year of the CAFR is 2014 and indicated 697 employees were "cut" between 2008 and 2014. If one applies the CAFR number, it would only make the city's performance worse as the "savings" should have been $93 million. I applied the Budget figures as I could compare years 2008 through 2016.

However the CAFRs show an interesting and I believe very important fact about the City's allocation of employee "cuts." The CAFR shows that a disproportionate number of "cuts" were made to Public Safety which is supposed to be the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY OF CITY GOVERNMENT.

The CAFR shows that 48% of all eliminated positions were from Public Safety while not a single cut was shown in General Government! In fact General Government added 14 FTE positions while reducing Public Works and Community & Cultural FTE positions by 52%. Evidently, public safety doesn't seem to have as high a priority with the Mayor and Council as General Government staffing.

Which leads to another interesting statistical fact. The CAFR shows that along with staff cuts, LBFD's response time to Fire On-Scene times significantly increased (worsened) between 2008 and 2016. The 2014 CAFR shows the Fire On-Scene arrival time for emergencies within 6 minutes was 70.6% in 2008. It FELL to 50% in 2014, a 29.1% decrease. I wonder if this worsened result for taxpayers had anything to do with staffing levels and policy decisions.

So, I ask, how can Mayor Garcia and the Council be "fiscally responsible," crediting themselves for wise budget decisions year after year, while the City appears to be so profoundly broke that it can't provide but a fraction of essential services the City ought to provide and previously provided?

It is clear to me that based on the fiscal facts, this Mayor and Council have much to do to improve the quality of life and the finances of our great City. Taxpayers today have fewer Police Officers, fewer fully staffed fire stations, more pot holed streets, more decaying buildings, poorly maintained parks, cracked and unsightly sidewalks and an increase in quality of life crimes in our neighborhoods.

Voters and taxpayers should commend elected officials for their successes and hold them accountable for their failures. And that should be based on fiscal facts not campaign suitable rhetoric. It is clear by the information contained in the Budgets and CAFRs and the physical condition of our city that Long Beach taxpayers today are paying more and receiving less.


Opinions expressed by LBREPORT.com, our contributors and/or our readers are not necessary those of our advertisers. We welcome our readers' comments/opinions 24/7 via Disqus, Facebook and moderate length letters and longer-form op-ed pieces submitted to us at mail@LBReport.com.


Advertisement

Advertisement

Scroll down for further

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


Advertisement

Previously on LBReport.com: Common Sense by Terry Jensen (continuing series):

  • No. 33: Show Us What's In And Isn't In Proposed Revised Queen Mary Lease, Because...

  • No. 32: I'm A Long Beach Crime Victim...Again

  • No. 31: Mungo's Mangled Facts Misstating Airport History, Shrugging Constituents' Concerns, May Mean Short Council Reign
  • No. 30: Sac'to Senate Republicans Join Lemming Run Toward Costly New Long Beach Civic Center

  • No. 29: Stop The Costly Project Labor Agreement, See Evidence Cited In 2011 "Common Sense" Essay

  • No. 28: Fourth in a Special Series: How Council Is Asked To Squander MILLIONS Annually In Civic Center Deal

  • No. 27: Third in a Special Series; Open letter to Councilmember Stacy Mungo and 5th District Residents (And Anyone Who Cares About Long Beach)

  • No. 26: Vincenzo Cristiano and the Best Dish Washer Nino's Ever Had

  • No. 25: Second in a Special Series: Civic Center: "A Once in a Lifetime Opportunity" OR "Just Another Stupid And Expensive Idea"?

  • No. 24: First in a Special Series: Civic Center: "A Once in a Lifetime Opportunity" Or The Biggest Boondoggle in Long Beach History?

  • No. 23: What Is City Mgm't Trying To Hide From Council And Taxpayers On New Civic Center, And Why Are They Hiding It?

  • No. 22: Double Standard Accepts Defeat As Victory

  • No. 21: March of the Lemmings: Public-Private Partnership Proposed For New Civic Center

  • No. 20: Long Beach: Why Are Stupidities Tolerated, Mediocrities Applauded And Priorities Bewildering?

  • No. 19: Public Private Partnership Isn't Panacea, May Invite Higher Cost To Rebuild Long Beach Civic Center

  • No. 18: Accountability

  • No. 17: Good Or Bad Deal For Taxpayers? Info & Answers Needed Before Council Leases Parking Spaces To 6th/Pine Owner

  • No. 16: New Taxes? Get Serious First

  • No. 15: Important Questions Not Asked, Answers Needed Re Uncollected Parking Ticket Revenue

  • No. 14: Using Bad Technology To Excuse Bad Management

  • No. 13: Ruling By Obfuscation, Enabled By Mayor & Council

  • No. 12: Mystery Holiday Moves Mayor To Propose Canceling Jan. 3 Council Meeting

  • No. 11: Public Officials Shrugging Public Costs Of Project Labor Agreements

  • No. 10: Outsourcing City Hall

  • No. 9: Lack of City Hall Credibility, Not Residents' Complaints, Deters Quality LB Developments; Restoring Trust Requires Accurate Information & Respectful Partnership b/w Residents & Officials

  • No. 8: Council Grants Permit With Conditions Requiring What City Hall Already Basically Requires & Residents Deserve

  • No. 7: Facing A De Facto Precedent Proposed at 2nd/PCH

  • No. 6: Put Redevelopment In Council's Hands, Make LB Elected Officials Accountable (For A Change)

  • No. 5: Suppose Our City Officials Had Applied These Efforts To Assure World Class Kroc Center Instead Of For This, This & This

  • No. 4: Council Majority Either Didn't Know, Or Knew But Didn't Disclose, Amount Of Taxpayer Dollars Potentially Up In Smoke On Med MJ Vote

  • No. 3: City Hall & Its Boosters Created Budget Mess (Quit Blaming Recession); Proposed Proportional Cuts Don't Prioritize; Council Needs To Define Core Items & Cut Others

  • No. 2: Costs vs. Benefits: Council's Costlier-Than-Necessary Seawall Fix = Decaying Belmont Pier & Other Shoreline Assets

  • No. 1: Santa, Call LB City Hall: Taxpayer Leased Vacant Bldg. (New Home To Daisy Lane Xmas Displays) Invites Annual Public Review of All City Owned/Leased Properties And Zero-Based Budget



    blog comments powered by Disqus

    Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:


    Follow LBReport.com with:

    Twitter

    Facebook

    RSS

    Return To Front Page

    Contact us: mail@LBReport.com



  • Copyright © 2015 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here