Support the LB businesses you see here:

Carter Wood Floor pic
Carter Wood Floors, a LB company, will restore your wood floor or install a new one. Special offer for LBReport.com readers, click photo.

Lovelace pic
Who is this guy, Bill Lovelace? Click on picture to find out.

NetKontent
NetKontent Digital Video Cutting Edge Services For The Internet, Broadcast and Multimedia. Click For Info

Tank pic
This vehicle in Iraq (courtesy USMC) is well insured. Are you? For auto, home, business, health, boat, motorcycle coverage, call Pollman's Insurance: 23 yrs. in business, 4th generation LB family. Info, click photo


Nino's Ristorante: A delicious treasure in Bixby Knolls. Click here if you're hungry or for catering!
3853 Atlantic Ave.

The Enterlines
Bill & Karen Enterline are ELB realty experts. Click here for info on area property values.

Your E-Mail
Click here

  • Neighborhood Groups/Meetings
  • How To Recall a LB Elected Official
  • Crime Data
  • City Council Agendas
  • Port of LB Agendas
  • E-Mail Your Councilmember
  • Council District Map
  • LB Parks, Rec & Marine
  • LB Schools
  • LB Airport Watch.org
  • Sacramento
  • Washington
  • References & Archives
  • Lost, Found & Adoptable Pets
  • LBReport.com

    News in Depth/Perspective

    City Mgt Memo Says Sac'to Could Derail LB Deficit Reduction Plan, Making It Hard To Avoid Cutting Police, Fire, Libraries & Core Services


    (July 5, 2003, text updated July 7) -- In a monthly budget performance report agendized for the July 8 City Council meeting, City Manager Jerry Miller has approved a memo by City Hall Director of Financial Management Robert Torrez which says possible actions in Sacramento -- still uncertain and changing daily -- could derail city management's plan to reduce the Council-incurred deficit by costing LB City Hall millions of dollars...which the memo says would make it "extremely difficult" to cut further city staff positions "without eliminating sworn positions" (i.e. police and fire).

    Fuming at developments in the state capital, the memo states in part:

    Recent events with regard to State proposals to take millions of dollars of Long Beach revenues is [sic], to say the least, discouraging. The State's inability, or unwillingness, to deal with its budget problems in an appropriate manner, by reducing costs and raising taxes, will result in significant changes to local government services throughout the State. Cities, including Long Beach, will no longer be able to provide the kinds of services that our citizens take for granted. Many of us have traveled to Sacramento to lobby and to testify in support of local government. Unfortunately, the group that stands to suffer the most, our citizens, have been largely silent throughout this political fiasco. There has never been a more desperate time for cities and counties.

    If the State reduces local government revenues we will no longer be able to protect core services and will have to include potential closures of branch libraries, reductions in park programs (including youth and seniors) and reduced staffing for safety services.

    In the memo (which LBReport.com posts in full on a link below), city management says City Hall funds are (with some possibly transitory exceptions) performing fairly close to expectations...but at least two possible state scenarios could have potentially serious local consequences:

    • As previously reported by LBReport.com, the Davis administration has triggered a tripling of CA's Vehicle License Fee, requiring drivers to pay out of pocket what the now depleted state surplus used to cover...but the drivers' money may not kick in for 90 days and the memo indicates concern that during that 90 day period, City Hall may not get "backfill" payments from Sacramento that were previously forthcoming. That could cost City Hall as much as $8 million. "You will recall that when the VLF was reduced in 1998, the State kept local government whole by backfilling the revenue loss with State general funds," Mr. Miller writes, adding "State staff does not anticipate the higher VLF revenue to begin flowing to the State for 90 days. If so, the loss to Long Beach during that 90-day ramp-up period could be as high as $8 million if the State backfill is not continued."

    • The memo also notes "an earlier proposal by the Legislature to take $1.16 billion in undesignated funds from local government. The loss, which is calculated on a VLF per capita type formula, would be $16 per capita or approximately $7.7 million to Long Beach. The shift was initially proposed as one-time, but more recently has been talked about, in the Legislature, as a permanent, annual "hit" on local government."

    The city management memo says:

    The information coming out of Sacramento is confusing and changes daily. These losses would be devastating to Long Beach. Long Beach’s Three Year Plan eliminates close to 500 positions over the next three years, but leaves most essential services, such as sworn police and fire positions, intact. A loss of the magnitude being proposed by the State may require that hundreds more positions be cut, something that would be extremely difficult to do without eliminating sworn positions...Staff will provide updates as they are received. It is clear, however, that the best-laid plans of local government are being laid to waste by our State Legislators.

    The memo adds:

    It is still anticipated that the $11.7 million carryover target needed to balance the FY 04 budget will be achieved. However, this forecast is predicated on continuing to receive VLF revenue, as budgeted. If the backfill is not replaced with new revenue, a loss of $8 million or more would essentially wipe out the projected carryover.

    The memo notes that steps are being taken to "rebuild" City Hall's Insurance Fund balance...which city management revealed in April had been depleted to only roughly $3 million.

    The FY 03 ending Insurance Fund balance is expected to be approximately $6 million, which includes an additional $3 million in revenue from additional charges to departments in FY 03 and the elimination of a budgeted operating transfer to the General Fund. As explained in the April report, these efforts are being taken to address increasing insurance costs and rebuild the fund balance to support future liabilities. In consultation with the City Attorney and City Auditor, a multi-year plan will be developed to rebuild the Insurance Fund. The need for this plan will also be addressed in the soon to be initiated consultant study. In FY 04, as a first phase, charges to departments are budgeted to fully cover current Insurance Fund costs. The affect of these increased charges on programs, services and funds are currently under review. The consultant's recommendation will be taken into consideration in rebuilding reserves for FY 05 and beyond.

    The memo reminds the Council that city management said in April that higher workers comp, liability and medical insurance costs, plus other operating costs (including increases in equipment maintenance service contracts) will boost the projected FY 04 General Fund budget-gap from the initially projected $52 million to a revised projection of $59 million.

    Staff has been working feverishly on several initiatives that, if successful, could help bridge part of the growing gap until additional reductions can be identified, thereby avoiding more severe budget cuts.

    Recent events with regard to State proposals to take millions of dollars of Long Beach revenues is, to say the least, discouraging. The State's inability, or unwillingness, to deal with its budget problems in an appropriate manner, by reducing costs and raising taxes, will result in significant changes to local government services throughout the State. Cities, including Long Beach, will no longer be able to provide the kinds of services that our citizens take for granted. Many of us have traveled to Sacramento to lobby and to testify in support of local government. Unfortunately, the group that stands to suffer the most, our citizens, have been largely silent throughout this political fiasco. There has never been a more desperate time for cities and counties.

    If the State reduces local government revenues we will no longer be able to protect core services and will have to include potential closures of branch libraries, reductions in park programs (including youth and seniors) and reduced staffing for safety services.

    The memo can be viewed at May '03 budget performance update

    Additional Background/Perspective

    The City Council will confront its growing FY 04 projected deficit when it adopts a FY '04 budget, due by the end of Sept. The new budget will cover the period coinciding with the run-up to elections for Council districts 2, 4, 6 and 8.

    In November 2001, two of those incumbents -- Councilmembers Dennis Carroll and Rob Webb -- voted to give then-City Manager Henry Taboada a pay raise (whose salary was already higher than the Governor's). Councilman Baker voted against it. Councilwoman Richardson was absent for entire meeting. (Now-former Councilman Grabinski exited about 45 minutes before the vote, then reappeared roughly 60 seconds after). Shortly before casting his vote, Councilman Carroll told the public that unlike Sacramento, LB City Hall was in good financial shape:

    ...I think it's important for our citizens to know, and to feel comfortable with, the financial solvency that we enjoy now. This again, in my mind, comes to us largely because of the budgeting processes that we have undergone.

    ...[The state is] facing a $12 billion deficit, largely it seems based upon the state's handling of their energy crisis, that attempt to subsidize those rates for an extended period of time, and they are now in a position where something has to give...[T]hey have found themselves in a fix that we because of the planning of our city manager avoided. Now while the circumstances aren't exactly parallel, I think that it merits our acknowledgement of our situation...

    About six weeks earlier in September 2001 (and after Sept. 11), the City Council voted to adopt a budget that covered the run-up to the 2002 city elections for Mayor, citywide offices and Council districts 1,3,5,7 and 9. That budget increased spending and included a $1 million increase (spearheaded by now-Vice Mayor Frank Colonna) beyond the $750,000 proposed by city management for the "Public Corporation for the Arts." That budget also included "discretionary funds" for spending (by Council vote) as suggested by Councilmembers for their own districts (a practice ended in the FY 02-03 budget, adopted Sept. 2002; some critics charged the discretionary funds gave incumbents a political boost). By this time, the Mayor and other incumbents had been re-elected.

    During late 2001 and early 2002, city management warned in agendized memos (reported by LBReport.com) of the Council's increasing deficit. Much of LB's establishment assured voters that City Hall was on the right track. After virtually all incumbents seeking re-election had been returned to office, Mayor O'Neill admitted the magnitude of the deficit in August 2002 when she publicly released the proposed FY 02-03 budget. In September 2002, Councilmembers voted to discharge Mr. Taboada.

    Neither city management nor Mayor O'Neill have yet made public their FY 03-04 proposed budget...although nothing forbids them from doing so. The City Charter requires the City Manager to present a proposed budget to the Mayor no later than August 1...and requires the Mayor to release it to the Council (and the public) with her suggested changes, no later than August 15.

    Ultimately, decisions on what to spend and/or cut are not made by the Mayor or city management. The decisions are made by voted action of a majority of the City Council.

    As previously reported by LBReport.com, a written evaluation by a City Hall budget consultant indicated the General Fund's deficit (spending exceeding revenue) reflects years of previous structural deficits...worsened by the Council's Sept. 2001 budget vote that ballooned FY 2002 spending.

    The written evaluation stated in part:

    The City of Long Beach General Fund has a major structural imbalance. Simply stated, ongoing revenues are insufficient to provide the dollars needed to support ongoing programs. For several years, this problem has been masked by the use of one-time revenues to close the gap. This has created a false impression of solvency."

    ...During the recent years, Long Beach has maintained cash and to some degree, budgetary solvency. Cash solvency has been maintained due to the City’s healthy cash flow. This has enabled it to meet current obligations without borrowing. Unfortunately, while budgetary solvency has been achieved, it has been done through the use of one-time financial sources. Long-term solvency, however, has not been attained for several years."

    The written evaluation, given to Councilmembers and the Mayor in advance, was placed on the Council's July 1 "consent calendar." It received no public Council discussion before Councilmembers sent it a Council committee.

    LBReport.com has placed the written evaluation online (updated to include additional pages, charts and conclusions not previously posted). To view it, click:

  • Len Wood General Fund Evaluation (pp. 1-19).

  • Len Wood General Fund Evaluation (pp. 20-34).


    Return To Front Page

    Contact us: mail@LBReport.com

     

    Copyright © 2003 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Third parties may cite portions as fair use if attributed to "LBReport.com" (print media) or "Long Beach Report dot com" (electronic media). Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here.