Spokane7
61°
December 23, 2010 in City
2011 Spokane budget limits layoffs
Fee increases, union concessions help preserve city services
What started out as 71 city of Spokane layoffs has dwindled to only a couple.
In September, Mayor Mary Verner announced that 71 employees would lose their job the day after Christmas to deal with the city’s $13.6 million budget shortfall.
A combination of union concessions, retirements and attrition allowed some workers to keep their jobs and others to move into open slots. Those changes left only about five people who will be forced out of a city job. Of those, all but a couple are eligible to retire.
Verner called the final budget “a success story.”
“We have a budget that retains almost every service,” she said in an interview Tuesday. Until the city’s fire union agreed to concessions, the city was considering the closure of a fire station. Until the Spokane Police Guild followed suit, 35 police officers were scheduled to lose their jobs.
Still, the budget includes a 17 percent increase in wastewater fees and nearly wipes out what remained of the city’s rainy-day fund (the city still has other reserves that aren’t as flexible). The sharp increase in rates led City Council members Nancy McLaughlin and Bob Apple to vote against the budget.
“I’m afraid that we will be breaking people’s backs,” McLaughlin said during budget discussions on Monday.
Divisions funded by taxes that didn’t have unions taking concessions were slashed by 9 percent, including the Street Department. Units that made concessions were cut by 3 percent.
Joe Cavanaugh, president of Local 270 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said the city has worked with the union to help find openings for laid-off workers.
The union is the city’s largest and didn’t agree to concessions. Cavanaugh said the union had a plan that would have saved just as much but that Verner wouldn’t budge. City leaders responded that in such a dire year there wasn’t much room to negotiate.
“I’m just very concerned that anybody is without a job at this time of year in this economy,” Cavanaugh said. “I’m not happy at all that it’s reached this point.”
MAC faces angry crowd 
Albert on December 23 at 9:45 a.m.
“We have a…” attempt to make you pay for really pitiful news on how “We The People” will pay more for less…beginning with this “pay for” news article. Oh joy.
Despite all of this, I do hope all of you are enjoying our spring like weather. We are blessed to not live in S. California wherein the mud runs through the homes and leaves people literally homeless for years to come. Pray for these folks when they come to your mind over these holidays. Blessings to all of you. Albert
deacon46 on December 23 at 10:24 a.m.
I believe that the city could cut further and not have to raise rates on essential items. Seems to me that worrying about the environment at time like this is a bit like worrying about arranging the deck chairs on the titanic. I am not suggesting we polute or to not concern ourselves about the future but raising rates on water and trash etc., at time like this is plain stupid. These experiements in water run off on Lincoln or moving a school because we think our kids might learn more is just nonsense. There is no basis for these spending projects other than the city government has too few things to do and too much time to think about projects that have in rality zero tangible benefits to us the tax payers.
Too much about city government is “the way we have always done it” and the resulting featherbedding. I don’t like to see anyone loose their jobs but the city is not lean and mean in its approach. Measuirng productivity of employees and departments is not a good approach, the basic approach is “do we need the services ? ” and then measure the performance against the need..
west on December 23 at 10:42 a.m.
It will all be back for 2012……more cuts.
greenlibertarian on December 23 at 12:08 p.m.
“These experiements in water run off on Lincoln or moving a school because we think our kids might learn more is just nonsense. There is no basis for these spending projects other than the city government has too few things to do and too much time to think about projects that have in rality zero tangible benefits to us the tax payers.”
-william
Here’s a clue, Spokane City government has next to nothing to do with School District 81.
(precedes) “Lincoln Street was arguably one of the bumpiest arterials in Spokane before the reconstruction, which took $1 million out of a 2004 voter-approved bond issue.
None of the street money was used for storm gardens. Spokane’s wastewater utility spent $700,000 for that part of the project.
“Lincoln Street a year ago, it was like Beirut,” Taylor said.
The cost of the system is in line with other storm water containment projects being built along the Spokane River to prevent periodic storm-caused spills of combined sewer and storm water.
The program is part of a wider city effort to comply with the Clean Water Act by reducing sewage pollution going into the river.
Lincoln’s gardens will be able to contain up to 86,000 gallons of storm water at a little more than $8 per gallon in construction costs, Taylor said.
Combined sewer overflow tanks to reduce spills are being installed at $12 to $14 per gallon for each gallon of capacity, he said.
“We are going to be looking at more and more of these,” he said.”” (continues)
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/aug/16/lincoln-redesigned-with-pond-in-mind/
The ponding program SAVES money.
Try paying attention for once.
Spokane_Citizen on December 23 at 5:13 p.m.
Greenlibertarian….these people will never let facts get in the way of their skewed and ignorant arguments. We can take comfort that the Clean Water Act is helping us move forward…despite the backward thinking of a few selfish and self-centered local tightwads.
Dazzeetrader11 on December 23 at 9:01 p.m.
Sometimes you greenie liberal types just amaze people like me. Verner runs this incredible shell game and usues dumb brains to explain her idiocy. Lincoln should be used for traffic. Verner in her green mania has put ponds and ths urge projects to work ona people movinf street. Taylor’s no genius either. It doesn’t and shouldn’t matter if the road was like Beirut….what matters is two fold. Listen up you two fools.
1. Traffic. lost half the the ability to move traffic. Sounds good? It isn’t. It’s stupid to sacrifice a 4 lant road to ponds and surge type things.
2. Does it really matter if the money comes from the City, COunty or State? Not when the only source..and this might be tricky for you goofs..the source is the public. SO if money doesn’t come from the city, it comes from the state or the fed or the…..
It always comes from the citizens and the taxpayer. Somebody in Streets made a decision to lose half a busy street to weeds and ponds. Nice call. Money spend wrong is money poorly spent. Might e that the ponds could have not taken traffic lanes out but maybe that would be too logical…but then again.nobody accused you greeies of being logical.
It’s money spent in an imbecilic way. Just like Verner’s real estate projects……imbecilic. But she’s not been shy about coming to the citizens for more money has she?
FInally though the 71 jobs were never in danger. She’s trying to set herself up as a savior and good steward for her next run. She has funds hiding worth $200 million..she just has done a terrible job. Too much spending and the leverage of a layoff (even a fake one) in bad times..in winter…might make her look good to you. BUT for those of us who know where the mney is and her real motives, she is the most incompetent, dysingenuous mayor who has done NOTHING since there’s been a mayor.
She’s lied to the citizens, lied to the unions and lied to her city hall workers. Now she wants more taxes on water, swer and garbage because??? She blew the river clean up fund ( ie rate stabilization money –$18 million– and she won’t tell you where it went. And all this while given her natives blocks of valuable real extate so she might reclaim her job if she fails. This isn’t going to be a fun run for her. Book that.