The City Council's Finance Committee will be meeting on Monday, October 13 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. We will wrap up the staff presentations for the 2009 budget and start our discussions of what to accept and what to modify. The committee's recommendation will go to the full Common Council in November and may be further modified there. The meeting is open to the public and is televised on the city's cable TV channel.
You may read the complete proposed budget (yawn) at:
2009 City of Brookfield Proposed Budget (256 pages, 5.8M)
The press summary stories are a good high level view. See:
Brookfield News, 10/8/08 Proposed budget would increase taxes slightly
MJS, 10/4/08 Brookfield looks for tax-levy increase
Based on questions during the meetings and comments made over the last year, I expect some of the aldermen will make some proposals for budget cuts. If we can't come to a conclusion on Monday, we will schedule an additional meeting during the next week or so.
Some possible reduction ideas are:
-
Adopt some or all of the mayor's suggested reductions provided with the budget.
Mayor Speaker made it clear that he did not endorse any of the ideas but was offering them at the committee's request. You may read the mayor's memo here:
Mayor Speaker's memo of 9/26/08 suggesting budget cuts
- As described in the mayor's memo, two police officer positions were added in the last couple of years. They were funded by moving two positions in the Department of Public Works (DPW) left vacant by retirements. Since officers are paid more and have better benefits and earlier retirement than DPW workers, the city had to raise the budget about $27,000, increasing over the next three years to $49,000 more. According to Police Chief Tushaus, the department's 65 sworn officers are actually 5 to 10 fewer than recommended by commonly used police staffing standards. This cut is about $163,000.
- As described in the mayor's memo, cut the DARE program for elementary school students. The program used to be heavily subsidized by the district attorney's office and private donations, but most of that funding has disappeared in the last two years. Officers teach the DARE courses outside their regular shift and are paid overtime. The DARE program costs about $36,000.
- Change the ambulance service to a two tier system. The current single tier system provides an ambulance at each of the three stations staffed by two paramedics (highest level of training for ambulance crew). When sent with the three additional firefighter/Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT), the 5 person unit meets the national standard to provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) care. That's roughly equivalent to what you would get in a hospital emergency room. It's first rate emergency medicine, but it's very expensive. An alternative is to downgrade two stations to Basic Life Support (BLS) staffed by EMTs and one station to ALS. The dispatch center would ask enough questions to triage the situation (decide which level of care to send). To be fair to all 40,000 residents with respect to response time, Fire Station 1 in the centrally located Public Safety Building would be the ALS unit. The potential savings are unclear since the staff has not been asked to provide a formal analysis. This two tier system was discussed at the Human Resources and Public Safety committee meeting of July 31, 2008 at the request of Fire Chief Myers. The Chief did not advocate for the change but wanted reassurance that the two tier model was the one the city wanted. No action was taken at that meeting. You may read the details of the two systems and more details on what ALS and BLS mean in the memos written by Chief Myers for the budget meeting.
- Cut the library new book budget. The requested amount is $255,761. The item for both 2007 and 2008 was $245,815. The mayor's memo offered a $20,000 cut (to $235,761) but the Library Board made it clear that the combined reduction and inflation over the last three years has significantly lowered the number of volumes purchased. If you believe the concept that "everything is available on the internet for free", this is easy to accept.
- As described in the mayor's memo, cut library staffing. This would force a reduction in library hours due to required minimum staffing levels. Certain details are subject to union negotiations, but it would probably mean an end to Sunday hours during the school year.
- Eliminate bike way and road projects. These are often opposed due to resistance by the residents whose lots include the new trails, so it appears to have popular political support. Then again, residents who walk, jog, have kids who use the trails, etc. might protest an virtual end to the program.
- Don't backfill positions as they open up due to retirements, etc. This won't help the 2009 budget, but may help future years. The projection for 2009 is that 50 of the city's 363.65 full time equivalent positions will become vacant due to retirements, people quitting, terminations (yes, the city does fire people for poor performance), etc.
- Increase all fees for Park and Recreation programs by 10-15% which amounts to $30,000 of new, non-property tax revenue. The programs will remain intact but the fee paid by participants will rise. This was discussed at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of August 11, 2008 (page 9).
I occasionally hear a resident make the claim that the city budget is "filled with fat" and that a dramatic cut is possible with no noticeable drop in service. When I ask the resident to cite some specific example of why they say that, I hear about the unwanted road widening in front of their house, the total lack of crime in Brookfield making the police department unnecessary, the public parks that the person never visits, etc. I have rebuttals for each of those but of course the resident "knows" that their claim is true.
So, what's your favorite example of where the city can cut? What are you willing to live without?
I plan to report on the discussion later this week. I doubt Monday's meeting will be the last word and I ask for your comments on what we should consider.
