Home › News › Local News
City's budget gap widening, says Ventura official
Council to hear proposals for cutting spending, saving funds money
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Local NewsThe city of Ventura's revenue problems are likely to deepen by July and could decline even further if the national economy continues to deteriorate, the city's top administrator warned Monday.
"I think our budget gap will be bigger," City Manager Rick Cole said Monday, and that would mean deeper cuts and potential layoffs to bring costs in line with revenues. The city's budget shortfall is currently projected at $4 million for the next fiscal year that begins July 1.
Cole will present a cost-savings strategy tonight to the City Council to try to get ahead of the ballooning deficit and give city staff members greater flexibility to respond to an ever-changing fiscal picture.
$4.2 million in cuts
The strategy includes a potentially controversial $4.2 million list of spending cuts and cost-saving actions that Cole would like to see adopted by the council this month or in May, well before the 2008-09 fiscal year begins July 1.
"We need to act sooner rather than later," he said. "Given what's happened over the last nine months, we are preparing for worse news in the next 15 months."
Cole already has implemented a hiring freeze and asked employee unions to discuss ways to trim costs, possibly deferring promised raises.
Layoffs or buyouts also could be needed if city revenues continue to worsen, he said.
While the council is not being asked to adopt any formal cuts tonight, Cole said, it is expected to weigh in on his proposals. He said it was premature to ask the council to adopt the cuts tonight without a public outreach effort.
The most immediate and painless savings likely would come from the postponement or cancellation of a handful of uncompleted city projects. The city could save $510,000 by canceling park improvement plans and reducing the scope of a citywide mobility effort, documents show.
Sand cleanup may be cut
An additional $587,000 could be saved by deferring improvements to Cemetery Memorial Park and stopping work on an unfinished project to build a fiber-optic network between city and school district facilities, Cole said.
Cuts proposed to be phased in between July and year's end include the closure of police storefronts around town, reduced park maintenance and clearing of sand from beach-facing streets, and fewer repairs to sidewalks, curbs and gutters.
City Hall also could be closed every other Friday and during the Dec. 25-Jan. 5 holiday season. Employees would not be paid during the holiday shutdown but could use accrued vacation time, officials said.
Even the City Council could get in on the savings, possibly agreeing to meet three times a month instead of four.
Not dipping into savings
Two cost-saving options not yet being recommended are a salary freeze and the use of reserve funds, said Jay Panzica, the city's chief financial officer.
"Using savings to pay for ongoing operations doesn't postpone hard decisions — it just makes them harder," Panzica said in a memo to the council.
The city spends $72 million a year on salaries, overtime, benefits and workers' compensation — more than 76 percent of its $94 million operating budget, Human Resources Manager Jenny Roney said.
City staffing levels are better than in recent years, with 13 unfilled vacancies out of 673 budgeted full- and part-time positions.
The city has a binding contract with the Ventura Police Officers Association that calls for a pay raise in October that could be as high as 12 percent for its 124 members, costing taxpayers about $2 million, officials said.
Top-ranking police officials — lieutenants, assistant chiefs and chiefs — are contractually guaranteed the same pay increase that officers get, but they have agreed to forgo any raise until January, Cole said.
Police Sgt. Gerald Foreman, president of the officers association, said Ventura's pay lags that of other county police departments. The association met in recent days, voting to reject a proposal by Cole. Both parties declined to discuss details of the proposal.
"We will continue to try to be part of the solution," Foreman said. "We understand the position the city is in and we are still open to other viable and fair solutions."
The City Council meets at 6 p.m. today at City Hall, 501 Poli St.
Posted by info on April 1, 2008 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Its now time to get that Wal-Mart open on Victoria Avenue to increase the city's tax base.
Posted by AnneHallock on April 1, 2008 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Residents interested in reading further detail may find the Administrative Report on the City of Ventura's website (www.cityofventura.net) or directly at:
http://www.ci.ventura.ca.us/newsmanag....
Anne Hallock
City of Ventura
Civic Engagement Division
Posted by jjplait on April 1, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's do some basic mathematics ... according to Human Resource manager Jenny Roney more than 76% of the $94,000,000 city budget is spent on salaries, benefits etc. This number brakes down to $106,983 per employee. Some, of course, receive higher compensation than others - but this is the "Average". Next, the Ventura PD is vehement in receiving their $16,129 per person annual wage increase. This, in addition to their average salary of around $135,000 per year, will bring their package to $151,000. In these days of near recession and 3% pay increases (if you're lucky) our city leaders plan to cut funds on infrastructure funding while padding some salaries by 12%? Sgt. Foreman pompously indicates, "Ventura's pay lags that of other county police departments." Well, maybe Sgt. Foreman should seek employment with the L.A. PD in South Central if it's too tough here. Why don't we just layoff 3 PD and save ourselves $450,000 instead of cutting off curb repairs, park maintenance and other city services which employ many more tax paying residents at a cheaper rate. Good grief ... 76% of the city budget spent on wages ... no wonder it takes 3 years of planning to get streets repaired. What is wrong with this picture folks?
Posted by shaver_one on April 1, 2008 at 11:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ventura could charge $1.49 per person, per month for the privilege of living in Ventura. They could attached it to your monthly water bill. They could call it a 'residency fee'.
Posted by MakingWaves on April 1, 2008 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
jjplait, your math doesn't quite work out. The average city employee doesn't make $106,000, even with benefits added in. Have you considered the outside contracted workers the city employees? Have you considered the very high cost of Workers' Compensation Insurance for our police and firefighters?
Sitting at your computer with a calculator in your hand does not make you an expert in city finances.
Posted by Equitable_Enforcer on April 1, 2008 at 12:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would suggest, as our fearless leader, that Mr. Cole set the example by volunteering to forego any raises, bonuses or "special" perks ... and that he return to the citizens of Ventura the funds he received to buy a home ... until such time as the budget is balanced with no lay offs of city employees. Oh, he has a contract?! So dumb of me to forget. Yes, I have issues with him. I told him of opportunities to bring in some real jobs in high tech manufacturing instead of service jobs ... but he chose instead to take the advise of others who had no knowledge of manufacturing ... one of three arenas in which true wealth is created.
Could not help but notice that police storefronts are on the chopping block. They are staffed with volunteers during the day who keep them in order. Located at the Mall, in Montalvo and on the Avenue, they serve as a place where officers can write reports, take a restroom break and get a snack, while not straying too far from their beat. When one works 12 hour shifts, especially in areas like Montalvo and the Avenue district, it is essential that officers have such a place to go. I haven't read the recommendations in full, but I'd imagine they will suggest something like using fire stations in their respective beats.
Posted by jjplait on April 1, 2008 at 12:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
makingwaves: I didn't say the city spends 76% of it's budget on salaries - the manager of human resources did. A 12% increase averaging $16,000 comes out to a salary of over $135,000. You do the math and quit being a mouthpiece for the city as if there's no room for improvement.
Posted by jjplait on April 1, 2008 at 12:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
makingwaves: of course the "average" city employee makes nowhere near $106,000 but there are a number of city employees making over $200,000. The $106,000 is the "average" given the data provided.
Posted by MakingWaves on April 1, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
jjplait,
My point is you do not have all the data in hand. You cannot make gross assumptions about complicated city finances from a few facts and figures in a newspaper article. Go down to City Hall and do your homework and then report back here if you want.
It's not that hard. I ask questions all the time and the city has been very forthcoming with data.
http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/vc...
Posted by jjplait on April 1, 2008 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
makingwaves : Apparently you know more about the salaries at city hall than the manager of HR.
Posted by MakingWaves on April 1, 2008 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What the HR was talking about is the General Fund, which is about $95 million. And yes, salaries come from that particular budget. Over half of that goes to public safety.
The city's TOTAL budget is $280 million. That includes capital improvement projects, employee services, supplies & services, capital outlay, reserves & contingencies & other expenses.
So in a total city budget of $280 million, about $72 million will go to salaries, overtime, benefits and workers' compensation. Workers' comp costs are breaking the backs of private business. Can you imagine what they must be for police officers and firefighters?
It is very misleading to start throwing out "averages" when you are looking at many different sets of employees (full time, part time, contracted) and different sets of costs.
Posted by Tom_Johnston on April 1, 2008 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The real problem is that everybody wants something from local government, and they either want it for free, or better yet, for someone else to pay for it.
Passage of Prop 13 changed everything. We have gone from homeowner (think stakeholder) taxation to sales taxation. The big earners in sales tax? Auto mall, Big Box stores, and big malls generally. Guess what happens when the economy tanks?
Folks don't buy cars, don't buy fancy electronics, don't buy more goofy overpriced athletic shoes etc. Sales go down at auto malls, Big Boxes and malls generally. Revenue goes down. What do people keep their money for? Paying the rent/mortgage, buying food, paying basic utilities and gas for the family car.
Add to that....
Little Billy needs an athletic field to play soccer on....can't cut that!
The road in front of my house looks nasty...lets run a street sweeper through every month!
The trees in our neighborhood need trimming...call the city to do that!
Hey, this town is a cultural wasteland..let's have a festival, and house artists! (don't get me started on "Bus to Home").
The roads are bumpy...City! Fill them potholes!
Hey! My neighbor wants to build a funky, firetrap of a house and move entire families into each room! Help! Where are the code enforcement people???
It goes on and on. We want it, but don't want to pay for it, we expect gratification without responsibility.
Some of my neighbors are talking about rebuilding fences between our homes...I've been asked to chip in. Ok..sounds good to me, I'll chip in.
Maybe we should do that with the athletic fields, water parks, dusty dirty roads, art venues and housing, and yes even potholes...just neighbor's getting together to fix stuff up and maintain it, if you want it, make it happen...RIGHT! That'll happen!
Local Government becomes the default to make all those things happen. I don't want to pay more for it, but like fixing the fence between my neighbor and me, yah, I'll chip in something reasonable.
I don't expect him to build it for me for free though....
Posted by kenclubber on April 2, 2008 at 5:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tom Johnston
Not for free, but services for our TAX DOLLARS IS WHAT WE WANT
Posted by marketrealist on April 3, 2008 at 5:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One issue of the police and fire is that anyone in uniform costs a lot of money because of benefits such as public safety retirement schedules. One question is if some of the work done by uniformed staff can be done by civilians or even better yet, contracted out. For example, do the people who handle the paperwork or other non-investigative functions in the police department need to be police staff?
Another question, why do we have local police force in various cities? There would be trememendous savings if we could combine police functions across the cities and the county. Right now, the County Sheriff is located on the corner of Telephone and Victoria, right in the heart of the City of Ventura. Would it be more cost effective for the City to use the County Sheriff instead of having its own force.
Tough questions which will obviously raise a lot of union and turf issues but that need to be raised.
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.