TITLE
Recommendation to consider and discuss the Mayor's Fiscal Year 2011 Veto Message, dated September 19, 2010, pursuant to Section 1704 of the Long Beach City Charter.
DISCUSSION
On Tuesday, September 14, the City Council adopted a balanced budget that included $18,5 million in reductions to the General Fund.
The cuts already approved by the City Council will result in 64 fewer police officer positions, 18 fewer firefighter positions and potential rolling brownouts of fire engine staffing throughout the city, a reduction of hours at all libraries to five days a week, reduced staffing at after-school parks programs and the reduction or elimination of recreational programming at several sites, and the elimination of a pothole truck, meaning 12,000 fewer potholes will be filled.
On, Sunday, September 19, the Mayor issued a veto of $2.7 million in General Fund expenditures and a veto of $60.432 million in the Harbor Department's capital outlay budget.
The City Council deliberated for nearly two months over the budget that was presented by the Mayor and City Manager to the Council, and the Council approved a budget that made cuts in the amount recommended in the Mayor's and City Manager's budget.
At no time during the budget discussions by the full Councilor the Budget Oversight Committee did the Mayor express any opposition to the Council approving appropriations in the amount of his proposed budget. Moreover, city management has indicated to councilmembers that from the time the balanced budget was approved by the City Council, until the Mayor issued his veto five days later, no additional financial figures have been issued indicating that the FY 2011 budget needed to be reduced further.
The Council and the public need a complete review of why the additional cuts are being made and how the cuts will impact services and jobs.
For the discussion at the September 28 Council meeting, we request the Mayor and/or the City Manager provide the City Council with specific information on what additional cuts in programs, services and/or positions will be required as a result of the veto.
Among the most impacted departments, the Mayor's veto will result in the following additional budget cuts:
Police Department $1,260,710
($650,671 in non-sworn expenditures and $610,039 in overtime, a 7%
additional reduction in the department's overtime budget)
Fire Department $ 392,617
($54,928 in non-sworn expenditures and $337,689 in overtime, a 16%
reduction in the department's non-callback overtime budget)
Public Works $ 283,956
Parks, Recreation and Marine $ 247,513
Library Services $ 123,830
Financial Management $ 100,686
Health and Human Services $ 53,525
In regards to the veto of the $60.432 million in the capital outlay budget for the Harbor Department, the Mayor states in his veto message that the veto is "related to construction of the new administration building."
However, in the Harbor Department's budget presentation to the City Council on August 24, 2010, the $60.432 million is specifically identified in the capital improvements as allocated for the Maintenance Yard Relocation. In addition, Port representatives have testified to the City Council that the $60.432 million does not even cover all of the project costs for the Maintenance Yard Relocation.
The Mayor has stated that he supports the relocation of the Harbor Department's maintenance yard. However, he has vetoed the entire amount allocated for this project in the budget based on the assumption that a significant portion of the money is for the administration building, which is contrary to the information that was provided to the City Council in the Harbor Department's budget.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve recommendation.
Respectfully Submitted,
COUNCILWOMAN RAE GABELICH
EIGHTH DISTRICT
COUNCILMEMBER PATRICK O'DONNELL
FOURTH DISTRICT
COUNCILWOMAN GERRIE SCHIPSKE
FIFTH DISTRICT
COUNCILMEMBER STEVEN NEAL
NINTH DISTRICT