Spokane7
68°
May 11, 2011 in City
City may tap ‘Photo Red’ money for general fund
Spokane Mayor Mary Verner gave a preview Wednesday of a 2012 budget she says would be painless for residents who obey the law.
Verner proposed to close a tentative $6.6 million revenue shortfall with a combination of administrative actions and $1.4 million in new revenue that would require council approval.
The new money would come from diverting $400,000 in red-light-camera traffic fines to the general fund, increasing parking penalty revenue by $200,000 and netting $800,000 by increasing the hotel tax.
“It would not be felt by any citizen of Spokane who obeys the law,” Verner told the City Council finance committee.
Verner also outlined a second, “all-cuts” budget that would save $551,600 by eliminating seven police positions.
That budget also would save $474,000 by freezing the library allocation, possibly forcing a branch to close, and $393,000 by eliminating the weights and measures, arts and youth programs.
Those cuts “are really not acceptable for a city of our size, of our caliber,” Verner said.
Both of the budget possibilities she outlined call for saving nearly $1.3 million by freezing the street allocation.
Other major savings include a $1.1 million draw-down of city reserves and a one-time, $1.3 million “rate holiday” to take advantage of a surplus in insurance reserves.
Those and other adjustments subject to mayoral control are included in each of Verner’s budget scenarios.
Her prescription for pain-free revenue relief depends in part on negotiations with the autonomous Spokane Public Facilities District. Verner wants to trade a hotel tax increase for a more-flexible admissions tax the district collects on its events.
Budget Director Tim Dunivant estimates that a hotel tax increase of 1.3 percentage points, to the maximum 12 percent, would generate $900,000 next year.
However, the tax is limited to tourism-related activities and would have little value in balancing the city’s general fund. The 5 percent admissions tax would generate only about $800,000, but it has no strings.
Verner’s proposal to shift $400,000 in “Photo Red” traffic fines to the general fund is likely to be controversial among council members as well as the public. It would essentially erase one of the city’s central arguments for the program.
Critics of red-light cameras say they’re cash cows aimed more at raising money than improving safety. To answer that criticism, the City Council required fine revenue to be used for traffic safety projects.
Chief Financial Officer Gavin Cooley said the proposed $400,000 transfer to the general fund is intended to leave $350,000 that originally was projected to go traffic programs.
The city currently nets about $500,000 a year from eight cameras that automatically nail motorists who run red lights or don’t come to a complete stop before making a right turn.
Four more cameras that are to be installed this year, and Verner’s proposal assumes they will bring next year’s take to $750,000.
Councilman Jon Snyder said using the money to balance the general fund may be a hard sell for some council members. Also, he cautioned, the cameras may produce less as drivers adjust their behavior.
At the council’s request, Cooley and Dunivant presented a “middle-of-the-road,” four-year levy lid lift proposal for asking voters to increase their city property taxes. The measure would generate about $2.5 million for next year’s budget.
However, Verner counseled against a property tax increase.
“I am getting a lot of concern (from constituents) about taxes, a lot of concern that this is not the time for tax increases,” Verner said.
That’s a shift from February when she suggested that a property tax was likely necessary to avoid service cuts.
Staff writer Jonathan Brunt contributed to this report.
Recent stories by John Craig
County districts nearly equal in population after latest adjustment December 27, 2011 1- Prosecutor defends decision-making December 14, 2011 44
- Man ignites fuel tank with torch, burns house December 11, 2011 9
- Fire forces temporary shelter evacuation December 11, 2011
- Murder trial delayed months while judge, prosecutor feud December 11, 2011 8
hawken on May 11 at 8:46 p.m.
Traffic enforcement is a “revenue generator.”
It has little to do with “safety.”
Police officers used to give verbal and written warnings to minor offenders. I suppose on occasion that some still might do that. These would be officers have a basic common sense.
Don’t get me wrong. Citations are valid. As long as they are not mandated by government to generate revenue first. Most violators of traffic laws are reasonable people and will readily respond to a friendly warning, in the interest of safety.
Just for the record. I have not had a citation nor a written warning in over 40 years.
Common_Sense on May 11 at 9:08 p.m.
Big brother and revenue. That’s about all the photo cameras are about.
Have you ever had one of those things flash on you at night for no apparent reason? I have. Even if the flash is for someone running the light, the distraction is bad for those obeying the law.
The city should not be looking at this as a source of income, next thing we know the entire city will have them at every intersection and we will end up having our bank accounts tied to our driver’s licenses so the fines can be sucked out like a vacuum.
Strangely, I’m with hawken on this, the cameras are bad and I too have not had so much as a verbal warning in a couple decades (knock on wood).
SpokyDaBear on May 11 at 9:53 p.m.
HAhaHAHa. You knew it was coming. Pretty soon we will have cameras on all the corners. The next step for the revenue cameras is installing automatic radar guns which will be dishing out tickets by the handful. Drive 31 mph in and 30 zone and BAM! You get a ticket. Talk on your cell phone without being handsfree and BAM! You get a ticket.
Dazzeetrader11 on May 11 at 10:24 p.m.
Verner raising every fee she can even think of. Why? To pay for her profligate spending in multiple areas. $15 million in unnecessary real estate purchases….alone! Bikes, trees, bikes, trees….anit business. Raise water fees, garbage fees, parking fees, and a whole host of losses she’s hiding.like $14 million in river clean up funds…Where’d she get those moneies? The rate stabilisation fund…allegedly untouchable.
She should resign. She hasn’t told you about her new union deal. It’s a very expensive one.
SO much for transparency.
I hope Dave Condon sends her packing back to her former job…tribal affairs. This woman is a mess.
hamrsrscarry on May 11 at 10:25 p.m.
35 years with no moving violations and I can live w this only because it diverts $ from SPD and they have to wait another budget cycle before upgrading their AR-15s and getting night vision goggles.
8john on May 11 at 10:31 p.m.
Why is it that a city has the authority to enforce a state law?
Did the city pass a law spelling out these infractions? Did they just copy state law for the fun of it?
If not why should a city court have authority to enforce a state law?
Why are city police doing the work of the State Police.
Something is fundamentally wrong with this picture.
The bottom line is if the State passes a law and wants it enforced then the legislature should fund its enforcement.
Might it be time to roll back the function of city government to serve the citizens of the city rather than enforce state laws.
Yes - it is time to get real. If legislators had to pay for what they legislate they might spend less time creating new regulations every session.
What is the ultimate justification and end of having a camera everywhere - control of the citizens!
Positively something we can not live without - but we have done pretty well without all this control for years.
Hcklbery on May 11 at 10:57 p.m.
Those cuts “are really not acceptable for a city of our size, of our caliber,” Verner said.”
STILL in denial that our living way beyond our means is sustainable when it IS NOT.
PlanB on May 11 at 11:34 p.m.
“controversial among council members as well as the public”???
How could anyone say that and actually believe it?
The city council has already made it clear that they are willing to ignore public safety and inflate the already bloated bureaucracy in order to screw the public out of money for “infractions” that are of no safety concern and have been created out of thin air.
What’s next - putting cameras on everyone’s driveway to ensure you don’t back out of your garage without signalling?
hamrsrscarry on May 11 at 11:38 p.m.
“of our caliber”
Ouch, Mayor.
PlanB on May 11 at 11:41 p.m.
When these cameras first went in, I contacted both my city councilmen and they both insisted that they were surprised that there wasn’t more public resistance, if there were they would have voted against, and that the contract would be reviewed in one year and would not be renewed unless the data showed an improvement in safety.
Well, the data is in, there is plenty of public resistance, there is no improvement, and yet they voted not only to renew the contract but to add yet more cameras.
This is what is called lying. Why would anyone expect these liars to be able to handle more important and complicated matters if they can’t even get the easy stuff right?
Dazzeetrader11 on May 11 at 11:50 p.m.
Vote for Corker, Mike Allen, Steve Salvatori and whomever is running from the northest. Send Verner away…all this will be gone. I only know Corker but he can’t be worse than Shogan (who’s behind much of this)…and seems to be a lot better.
Rush must go. He doesn’t have the brains for anything but bikes and tress and taxes and anything that will kill of automobiles. The present group is just maddening when I watch the council meetings on the net.
hamrsrscarry on May 11 at 11:51 p.m.
cameras capture
your reckless heart
recompense
your city of lilacs
a shrub vulgar yet
perfumed
much like your foot
jabbing at the pedal
racing the tick
tock
tick
tock of the microseconds
to red and click!
spokanedan on May 12 at 8:39 a.m.
I actually agree with most of the comments, and would like to add that transferring the red light camera money to the police sounds like misappropriation to me, and I thought that was illegal, but not in Spokane I guess. Also what about the 20 car tab fee, that was supposed to go to street repairs, doesn’t that qualify as a “tax” increase, and now I understand that is going to the police also. Maybe we should take a look at their new pay and retirement agreement.
Dazzeetrader11 on May 13 at 12:52 a.m.
Dan…you’ll never see the agreement. She’ll hold it till the elction is over. She just transparent that way. Youwouldn’t be the first to ask.
It’s a shell game at City Hall. She wants money to cover her outlandish spending…some of which remains hidden from view.
And if someone might speak up, they’ll be laid off or transferred.or worse.
spokanedan on May 15 at 1:25 p.m.
Interestingly enough, in 2002, the average salary of a Police Captain in Spokane was between $92 and $99,771.45. Seems as if they really got some great cost of living increases. In 2010, last year a detailed line item budget was released, one police captain was being paid $137,161.00. That does not include fringe benefits like health insurance and retirement. All this at taxpayer.s expense. The Mayor appears to have done a great job of negotiating with the Police Union.
meyerlansky on July 17 at 5:41 p.m.
Extortion on the grandest scale……and the Mayor wonders why more and more average citizens despise their city government!