Council’s budget discussions and ultimately our decisions will have an impact on the city and all of its residents.
Already it has generated a great deal of discussion and more than a few comments to posts on this blog. I thought it would be appropriate to put up a post dedicated to that discussion. I would like to hear from all of you.
These are troubling times for the nation’s and world’s economy, perhaps the most precarious since the Great Depression according to some commentators. Many people are fearful, nearly everyone unsettled.
It is not easy trying to balance a budget and meet the city’s needs in any year, let alone in a year like this. Yet we must.
There has been some criticism of council’s request to get an idea of the cost to taxpayers of putting some money aside for paving, emergency demolition and marketing/economic development beyond the current spending level. I think all of us are looking to the future in asking that, but I don’t know of any yet committed to taking that step. We are still sorting through things. We don’t even know yet what it will take to balance a status quo budget.
I don’t know of anything left to cut in city operations, but I’m willing to look. However, I also think we need to very carefully consider the future in what we do and not just today. I also think in today’s economic climate and given the needs of the city we need to be very careful we don’t make any rash decisions. Of course, rash, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
And finally, I will tell you I think there are worse things than a tax increase, and that would be allowing the city to decline to the point where resurrection is all but impossible.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
34 comments:
I tend to look at it from the point of view that if you don't bring in jobs that pay enough above basic subsistence level then you'll never have the tax money to fund the rest of what you want to do (roads, market, whatever) because if you just keep taxing those who have it more and more they'll get tired of paying for all those who aren't.
This area needs to work on job development and a ready-to-go labor pool.
John,
I don't believe anyone in Oil City is expecting cuts in the essential departments, its in the fringe add ons that I would like to see some pull back in spending.
The arts in most cities are privately sponsored, not so here. If we are not getting our monies value out of the ORA then go to them and demand better, or pull back funding to them.
I don't presume to have all or any answers, I do presume to expect more from the elected council. Don't let the city decline to the point of no return, don't gamble on what could be done, take care of what can be done now.
It is disheartening to watch a council member make up a budget out of thin air, worse to believe the cities hiring pool is better because 5 miles out of Oil City we have more qualified people than in our own city limits, and down right disgusting that people who do try to do something for the city get little or no support from some members of council for no better reason than politics.
If you want buy in for raising taxes show us a plan, tell us more than we have nine nameless artists, show me more pieces to the puzzle than this, tell me there is a bigger picture and explain how we are going to get there.
Finally if you want the cities attitude to change and to start believing in what can happen, then council's attitude has to change also. A smile when the camera is on is soon forgotten but a snide remark overheard lasts forever.
Condatis is right on the money.
Oil City needs jobs that pay enough to live on and to support a family.
The city should spend money to get jobs here, not artists.
I would like to suggest an option for the council to consider: furloughs of 2 or 3 days for city employees.
I’ll try to as quickly and concisely reply to Condatis and Anonymous 1 and 2.
First, I think everyone recognizes that good jobs are the backbone of economic revitalization for the city and entire region. Unfortunately, that is much easier said that done.
The city is committed to job development and that can be seen at our industrial park, the former Oil Well Supply facility. SMS Millcraft is growing and will continue to grow through investments the city is making. Other companies located there are also planning to expand, which is made possible by building expansion and a planned new building. The city has gone to a bond issue to finance the expansions, and it should be self-paying from the rents.
The Oil Region Alliance is, I believe, working diligently to attract new industries and help existing businesses stay and grow. It’s not an easy undertaking. We have some real competitive issues, including transportation.
There is no magic wand to waive to create good paying jobs.
I believe to attract business, industry and residents we need to have a city where people would want to locate. The arts revitalization is a part of that. It brings people, fills some storefronts and potentially creates a vibrancy that makes this a more competitive community. It alone is not the answer, but one part of a solution. In terms of tax dollars, it is a very modest investment.
Anonymous 1, your comment “don't gamble on what could be done, take care of what can be done now” is well taken. We have some things that are being done now, including the emerging Main Street Program.
To Anonymous 2, in my opinion the city work force is as lean as it can get – too lean in some cases. Having weekly day or two day furloughs simply wouldn’t work. The work those employees do and need to get done would not go away, we would just fall further behind.
I wish I had some better answers. I wish I had a magic wand.
John,
I was not suggesting weekly furloughs. I was suggesting two or three days in the new fiscal year. This would be between one and two percent of a person's yearly salary.
I know it's hard to get good jobs to come to Oil City, but that is what the city needs and so the mayor and council should work toward that end.
Anonymous,
My mistake. I misconstrued what you meant regarding the furloughs.
I appreciate the point you make, but I think in fairness we would also need to consider the impacts on city employees and their families. We get an awful lot out of our front line employees for what they make. In general, we have a great workforce.
I think every council has been focused on job development, but the truth is, there is not a whole lot that can be done other than make the community attractive to business and always plug away at it. We are always open to ideas.
I agree we need jobs, however there isn't really any space available in the city limits for manufacturing space development. Additional service type jobs like telemarketing within in the city doesn't bring much to the table - we all know that.
There has actually been a lot of hiring lately in the County. The manufacturers like Conair, Liberty, Joy, Sperian are doing quite well.
I think Oil City's problem lies in its ever growing rental housing stock that isn't retaining its value. There is also little to no new construction like there is in Cranberry and other out of town areas like Sandycreek Township. So you have all these renters living here, in older housing, generating minimal tax revenues. All those renters require the same City services as home owners and that just can't be supported. Rarely does a landlord maintain a property like a home owner. Over time, our housing stock has deteriorated.
The tax base is shrinking and even if you wanted to build in O.C. and pay higher taxes than anywhere in the county, where would you do that?
I'm just not sure adding jobs in O.C. limits would have that much impact. I think the problem is people who want to buy a home and can pay over $100K want some space around them and want a updated, modern structure so they build in Cranberry or snatch up the homes out there keeping the market values up.
If you could get an investor to buy up a few dozen blocks of old run down houses (I can think of several areas)and put up a bunch of single story patio homes with an attached garage, I would bet our aging, senior population would buy them up. That would increase the tax base and generate revenue.
I don't know much about the artists that relocated here but I do know of at least 5 that bought homes - to live in - not to rent out. Did anything else directly attract a buyer to O.C.? A very prominent relator in town recently commented that the arts program is attracting interest in properties.
Last anonymous,
I largely agree with everything you said.
I've often thought if it would be possible to do massive residential redevelopment, it would make a huge difference. I can picture it now with the river as a backdrop.
Short of that, I do think our neighborhoods continue to offer hope. I think city services are worth the premium, and I like walking to the library or drug store. I think in the future, that might again be a key consideration in deciding where to locate.
John,
I see you agree largely with the last post about rentals. Those self same rentals get taxes paid on them, have city water, are heated, and do get electric, they are on the same roads that need plowed during the winter, the same blocks that fires and crimes are committed. The people who live in them are people who work, and play in our city.
In case anyone missed it our seniors don't have money to spare either, don't believe me then check out a recent issue of the Derrick and the fact that the oldest business in town is no longer in business and their home is also up for tax sale.
Also in the Derrick is an article done on a family who recently moved here and how nice our housing stock is and she is telling all of her freinds how nice OC really is. Which one is it? Are we a slum town or a reviving city?
Frankly I agree that their are some neighborhoods that need serious attention, but this is a home owner and rental problem and both fronts need to be attacked not just the landlord who keeps the house on the city tax rolls.
There are those in Oil City who would like to blame someone else for the city's problems. Landlords make good scapegoats.
Landlords are rich outsiders who come here to Oil City and buy up houses and rent them out to the worst sort of people. Then they collect big rents and neglect repairs. Clearly landlords are sucking the city dry.
Something must be done.
I just wanted to respond to some points that "anonymous" made.
Anonymous said, "So you have all these renters living here, in older housing, generating minimal tax revenues."
I'm trying to figure out what tax revenues you are referring to. You have two houses. One house has a renter, the other is owner occupied. For both of these houses someone is paying real estate/property taxes. The individuals living inside are or should be paying per capita taxes. So what other tax revenues are we talking about? Both houses have the same tax responsibilities.
Anonymous said, "All those renters require the same City services as home owners and that just can't be supported."
Since taxes are assessed and being paid in exactly the same way for rentals as they are for owner occupied homes I'm not quite sure what you meant by that comment? Taxes are being paid on all homes regardless if they are owner occupied or rentals how can the same city services not be supported? When a home or apartment complex is assessed it is taken into account how many units there are or how many bedrooms a home has in order to know how many people could potentially be living there hence they can make an accurate assessment which allows the city to find a fair millage that includes city services. The more bedrooms or units you have the higher the assessment, the more you pay.
Anonymous said, "Over time, our housing stock has deteriorated."
Yes and can you imagine if all the renters left town and all those homes stopped generating tax revenue for the city!? Imagine how many more vacant, abandoned, and dilapidated properties the city would have to deal with. We all know that there are oh so many houses within the city that are in need of demolition. Imagine if we added all the rental housing to it!
Anonymous said, "If you could get an investor to buy up a few dozen blocks of old run down houses (I can think of several areas)and put up a bunch of single story patio homes with an attached garage, I would bet our aging, senior population would buy them up. That would increase the tax base and generate revenue."
This sounds great in theory. However, being in the rental industry and talking with senior citizens everyday I get to hear first hand exactly why our senior population is choosing rentals opposed to keeping their homes.
1. Maintenance. Homes require tons of upkeep. Grass, snow removal, home repairs and maintenance aren't easy and they don't come cheap! Most of these folks simply don't want to deal with it anymore and/or they cannot pay someone else to take of it for them.
2. Taxes. A lot of seniors that I have spoken to simply can't afford to or don't want to keep paying sky-high property taxes. Oil City has the highest property taxes in the county. Imagine what the assessment would be on a brand new home at our already inflated tax rate. If these folks have problems paying them now how would they pay them on a higher assessment?
4. Income. Luther Place, Seneca Court, Siverly Apartments, Moran Towers, and Towne Towers are all income based and have lots of senior citizens living within them. These seniors can simply not afford to purchase or maintain a home and must live within their means. These apartments are very nice and make life a whole lot easier for our seniors that are working with a budget.
Now having said all of that, the fact that you're thinking of new ways that could potentially revamp the housing stock and help out the city is awesome!! Keep up the good work!!
Anonymous said, "I don't know much about the artists that relocated here but I do know of at least 5 that bought homes - to live in - not to rent out."
I just have one thought on this. We were told that artists coming in would help us fix up the housing stock much in the same way the artists did in Paducah, Ky. The city of Paducah took a deplorable area of town and gave artists incentives to fix-up the old, run-down homes. Now what used to be a run-down area of town is once again attractive and vibrant. How many of the 5 artists bought homes that were fixer-uppers? I'm very happy that these artists decided to make Oil City their home. I'm also very happy that they can come in and buy big, beautiful homes at only a fraction of what they would cost somewhere else. However, it's not quite the way that the art initiative was pitched. Maybe we should look into giving more incentives to individuals that buy fixer-uppers. This would help regenerate the housing stock and keep slumlords from snatching them up.
Thanks!!
Jodi
It's not appropriate for me to discuss the details of home purchases, but two or three of the nine properties were in need of extensive renovations and there is interest in several more such properties. All are or will be owner-occupied. The ad we run features a home priced under $29,000.
That being said, people choose the property they like best at the price they can afford once they get here, regardless of the small incentive we offer to relocate to neighborhoods adjacent to the two downtown commercial areas. Last year you were concerned that we would follow the Paducah model and I wrote to reassure you that we were only working with houses already on the market.
Offering incentives to non-artists is outside the scope of my work, but it may be something for the new Redevelopment Authority to look at.
Well, the Derrick has the bad news this morning: taxes are going up. My goodness, health insurance premiums are up (for those lucky ones who have health insurance) and investment income is down.
I live on a fixed income and the bit of money I get from my investments is down, too. I worked my whole life, was frugal, and saved. And now I have to pay more taxes.
Jodi - You clearly have issues with the arts program and you need to get over it. It's just one thing we are at least doing to attract SOMEONE here. By the way, Joann, I believe pays real esatate taxes. Do you?
You also missed the anonymous point that landlords rarely maintain a home like a home owner and that is becoming obvious. It's a known fact that a city with the largest portion of it's housing as rental stock will be in trouble eventually. Obviously taxes are still paid on a rental, but you know most landlords (not all) will try to keep improvements at a minimum so that the assessment won't go up.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think many landlords are getting rich having rental property in O.C. but if you think there aren't a lot of "investors" who think you can make an easy buck at renting a cheap house in O.C. you are sadly mistaken. Most don't have the resources to maintain them properly and the end up dumped at tax sale. I am very thankful for the responsible ones that do and attract reputable tenants.
Also, there is a huge growing population of seniors (baby boomers) that are looking to downsize and I don't neccessarily mean living HERE. Did you get that? Not necessarily HERE. Many are not as interested in moving and buying in Florida but might like to be out of the bigger city and out of the real snow belt.
Watch how long a newer single story home for sale in Cranberry (or O.C. for that matter) stays on the market. Not long at all.
Is it dreaming that someone would put in a housing development geared to seniors that takes care of mowing, plowing, etc.? Yes, probably. However, they are being built outside of Pittsburgh and are coming ever further north.
In terms of crime, it is low here. I spoke to a neighbor that relocated back to St. Louis because of family issues and he LOVED O.C. and thought there were tons of interesting things to do for SENIORS : concerts, shows, library, YMCA/YWCA, etc. I think it's quite possible we are missing an opportunity with retired folks looking to downsize. Drake Drive in O.C. seems to be pretty popular! Its a good example.
I understand you manage a rental property. I'm not disparaging the responsible landords, like Red Coach. I think you misunderstood some of the comments posted.
Joann,
Thank you for answering questions regarding the arts initiative in a positive upbeat way! Also, I hope that I haven’t offended you in any of my postings that has never been my intention. Even though we see things differently you have always been polite and have never hesitated to speak with me. I did want to state that the only reason I was concerned with using Paducah as a model was because they used forced buyouts and eminent domain to acquire properties. We have enough blighted homes on the market or that are available on tax sale that we should not have to use these extreme measures.
John,
Perhaps you should consider not posting “anonymous” writings anymore although I’m sure that this wouldn’t take care of the problem as it is just as easy to type in a false name.
Anonymous,
It’s nice that you were able to use my name when responding to me. I wish I could say the same.
You state, “You clearly have issues with the arts program and you need to get over it.”
I want to state for the record, I do not have issues with the arts program. However, I do believe that the arts program should be privately funded as are most cities. If you will go back and read all the postings, I didn’t start the discussion on the arts another “anonymous” did. You should be able to appreciate that. Also, what exactly do I need to get over? Am I not allowed to have an opinion? My opinions are just that, my opinions and I’m not quite sure how to “get over” them. At least I’m not embarrassed or ashamed to put my name to mine.
You state, “By the way, Joann, I believe pays real esatate taxes. Do you?”
Since you obviously don’t understand the rental business I will enlighten you. You brought up Red Coach so we will use it as an example. Red Coach Manor pays over $80,000 in real estate taxes per year to the city. When Red Coach Manor’s owners decide what a tenant should pay in rent they look at property taxes as well as every other expense that the property incurs. Red Coach Manor’s owners albeit are very nice people, they don’t out of the goodness of their hearts pay the real estate taxes without figuring that into rent. Therefore, rent payments are used to pay the real estate taxes. So yes, in essence every single renter is paying for real estate taxes. If taxes go up, please take my word for it, rents will also increase.
You state, “It's a known fact that a city with the largest portion of it's housing as rental stock will be in trouble eventually.”
Again, your facts are skewed. According the last census taken by the United States Census Bureau (2000), Oil City has 2,977 housing units that are owner occupied as opposed to 1,785 renter occupied units. We will just have to wait until the 2010 census to get a more updated figure than that. So for now I don’t really feel that your point here is relevant to Oil City.
You state, “…but you know most landlords (not all) will try to keep improvements at a minimum so that the assessment won't go up.”
I must point out that there are a lot of home owners that do exactly the same thing. If you think ONLY landlords keep improvements to a minimum to avoid assessments than you are truly living in la-la land my friend.
You stated, “Don't get me wrong, I don't think many landlords are getting rich having rental property in O.C. but if you think there aren't a lot of "investors" who think you can make an easy buck at renting a cheap house in O.C. you are sadly mistaken. Most don't have the resources to maintain them properly and the end up dumped at tax sale.”
I’m not quite sure where this even comes from considering my posting stated nothing of this whatsoever!? If you are going to respond to me then please at least make sure you are responding to something that I wrote about.
You stated, “Also, there is a huge growing population of seniors (baby boomers) that are looking to downsize and I don't neccessarily mean living HERE. Did you get that? Not necessarily HERE. Many are not as interested in moving and buying in Florida but might like to be out of the bigger city and out of the real snow belt.”
Ok, point taken – They may not be living HERE.
You stated, “Watch how long a newer single story home for sale in Cranberry (or O.C. for that matter) stays on the market. Not long at all.”
I have not researched this and am unable to respond to it but thanks it gives me something to check into.
You stated, “Is it dreaming that someone would put in a housing development geared to seniors that takes care of mowing, plowing, etc.? Yes, probably. However, they are being built outside of Pittsburgh and are coming ever further north.”
Oh, so you mean like Towne Towers, Seneca Court, Luther Place, Moran Towers, Siverly Apartments and I guess we can even include Red Coach as well as Crestview and Friedhabers. Although these communities are not completely geared toward Senior Citizens they provide nice, affordable housing for seniors or anyone else that is on a budget. How is this comment relevant to what I wrote?
You stated, “In terms of crime, it is low here. I spoke to a neighbor that relocated back to St. Louis because of family issues and he LOVED O.C. and thought there were tons of interesting things to do for SENIORS : concerts, shows, library, YMCA/YWCA, etc. I think it's quite possible we are missing an opportunity with retired folks looking to downsize. Drake Drive in O..C. seems to be pretty popular! Its a good example.”
Yes, as I stated I think it’s great that people are starting to think of ways that could potentially revamp the city’s housing stock and help revitalize the city. If you will reread my post, I didn’t say that this was a terrible, horrible, awful idea that would never ever work. I was simply stating why it might not. How can you really ever discuss an idea without looking at every side good and bad? Also, I find it kind of ironic that you are using someone that moved out of town to prove your point.
You state, “I understand you manage a rental property. I'm not disparaging the responsible landords, like Red Coach. I think you misunderstood some of the comments posted..”
It seems like you know an awful lot about me such as where I work and where I live. I must admit I feel a little unnerved by this considering the fact that you won’t even post your name. Since you know all of these things about me please feel free to contact me by phone if you would like to discuss anything further as I will not be responding to anymore “anonymous” postings directed at me. As I’m sure you already know…I’m in book.
Thanks!!
"It’s not an easy undertaking. We have some real competitive issues, including transportation."
Hi John. I agree it isn't easy. But its the first step. Well actually, I guess the first step would be identifying competitive issues or roadblocks as you stated and removing them.
In the 2 minutes after reading your comments I went a googling and found the following:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080909/obama_rural_virginia_preview.html?.v=1
http://www.vaceda.org/pdfs/newsletter.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmshoring
In 2 minutes.
There have to be a myriad of resources to professionals and elected officials and administration workers that I don't even know about.
What caught my eye and what I followed above was the idea of being a lower cost place of doing business... we have a high tech region nearby - Pittsburgh. There have to be smaller or start up companies that would like to cut costs but remain in the area for many different reasons that would consider somewhere as close as here with lower costs (esp with all the nice start-up considerations we have). The other part of it is 'being somewhere people want to live'.
We might not be able to compete with Pittsburgh or State College as a place up and coming young people want to live (unless they are really into the out of doors, yay!) but we have many many positive attributes that we really need to play on. I even commented on another post of yours with a question to that effect - about the waterways development - and then saw the newspaper article about it which was wonderful. Another argument was recently made for keeping 7th St. elementary school open in Franklin, by not closing a school that could be an *attraction* for families.
Another way (and I could totally be grasping here) to market the area would be through social networking, green networking and a combination of the two. A lot of eco/outdoor/hightech places have heavy online presences. They have people who promote their area for free because they give them something to rave about. When there is an entire job posting board just for "green jobs" you know its gone beyond a fad.
I think a lot of what the state of PA itself is doing has already laid the groundwork for such promotions, its merely an extension of things they've already set up to make it location (our county) specific.
I think your blog is the beginnings of this for OC.
Condatis' most recent post was interesting. Jobs are critical to Oil City. There are people who can work anywhere because of the Internet. Oil City would be perfect for this kind of job. One thing standing in the way is lack of broadband Internet access in the area. Does anyone know what can be done to get this? I tried to sign up for Verizon DSL and was told I'd need to get 40 or 50 neighbors to sign up, too.
Speaking of the Internet, Condatis makes another good point: using social networking sites to spread the word about Oil City. This is something that can be done by anyone who has access to a computer. No need to spend tax dollars!
I would have to say that someone who takes the time to breakdown another person's salary on a per hour basis on a public blog, has a problem with the other person's position and program. That is over the top.
Also, if someone publicly chairs a large festival for two years and is very much in the public eye, it is not at all odd to know where they live and work. I wouldn't be too paranoid about that.
I think Mr. Hovis summed it up well in the Derrick when he said that many landlords are pulling income out of O.C. but NOT investing in it.
John, I think you are on the right track based on most of your comments. It's definitely better to focus on the positive here and not on the negative like "we are just a poor, little, dying town".
There must be businesses looking for cheap office space that, as stated earlier, can do business anywhere.
Could you possibly start a new post asking for ideas on how to attract or market O.C. to them? I'm thinking about a post just for that purpose. You could bring it up at a council meeting and tell folks with solid ideas to go to it. They would most likely be interney savvy!!
Once again I just want to say that I don't have a problem with Joann, her position or the arts program. I do however think that this position and program should be privately funded and not funded by tax payer dollars. I'm not quite sure why having this opinion makes me public enemy #1 but it's quite alright as I have disagreed with the "Oil City hierarchy" many times in the past and know exactly what the "consequences" are. Needless to say my skin is quite thick at this point.
No broadband? I can get it in Franklin - you can look it up on Verizon.com
Re the anonymous w/ the dedicated post idea for marketing OC. Am I wrong? Does OC not rely on the ORA for its development/marketing? Perhaps something from them on what they are doing, what resources they tap, something to show people in OC what they are doing for the region and how it impacts OC. Maybe even have a volunteer call for ORA volunteers from OC.
Jodi Robertson has hit the nail on the head with her comment that the arts program ought to be privately funded. I agree, and I believe a number of others do, too.
That's right. No broadband. I check at Verizon.com every other week or so and just checked again. No DSL at my address.
Who would privately fund an Artist relocation program? What would be in it for anyone to spend time trying to attract people to move to O.C.? Any ideas on a private funding source?
John, have you critically looked at all admin. positions at the city? It seems like there are assistants for the assistants. The tax payers aren't privy to all the jobs and descriptions but I have to wonder if some job responsiblities couldn't be shared. No one wants to see someone lose their job, but in today's day and age of voicemail, e-mail, Word, etc. secretarial support isn't as critical and more of a luxury. My company eliminated our secretaries years ago. These are tough times and time to suck it up and answer your own phone!
In terms of the ORA and DOWNTOWN O.C. I can't see why you would need to ask them what they are doing in that regard. Since the ORA was formed, have they recruited ANYONE to O.C.? Not that I know of.
“There must be businesses looking for cheap office space that, as stated earlier, can do business anywhere.”
Yes, but believe it or not, there is a lot of competition for that. Also, some of those businesses not everyone is happy in having. Some would say we have examples.
“Could you possibly start a new post asking for ideas on how to attract or market O.C. to them? I'm thinking about a post just for that purpose. You could bring it up at a council meeting and tell folks with solid ideas to go to it. They would most likely be internet savvy!!”
Not a bad idea. I think I will do that in a couple of weeks and see what comes of it.
“No broadband? I can get it in Franklin - you can look it up on Verizon.com”
My understanding is there are places – residences -- in the city where DSL is not available, and my guess that is true in Franklin as well. I’ve learned that what Verizon claims is a broad generality and the specifics are often much different.
“Jodi Robertson has hit the nail on the head with her comment that the arts program ought to be privately funded. I agree, and I believe a number of others do, too.”
AND
“Who would privately fund an Artist relocation program? What would be in it for anyone to spend time trying to attract people to move to O.C.? Any ideas on a private funding source?”
I believe the arts effort is a revitalization/ economic development program and the only way to have it move forward is with city funding. I think that is appropriate. Would I like to see it funded privately, sure, but that is not a reality. So I guess I agree with the latter comment.
“John, have you critically looked at all admin. positions at the city? It seems like there are assistants for the assistants. The tax payers aren't privy to all the jobs and descriptions but I have to wonder if some job responsibilities couldn't be shared. No one wants to see someone lose their job, but in today's day and age of voicemail, e-mail, Word, etc. secretarial support isn't as critical and more of a luxury”
I think over the years a lot of critical looks have been taken at staffing levels. The idea of there being all these assistants running around is somewhat incorrect. Often the “assistant’s” hat is one of many worn by a single individual. It enables them to step in and take over when needed. It really is remarkable the number of hats people wear and more importantly how willing they are to take on whatever task needs done, although I’m sure there are exceptions as there would be anywhere.
That is not to say we should not always be looking for efficiencies.
Howdy John.
I’m going to bring in a new topic here. Reducing City Council meetings by half as suggested by Mayor Hawkins.
I must admit I’m scratching my head here on this one. When Mayor Hawkins was running for the mayoral position one of her campaign promises was to be a “full time” mayor. This promise was echoed on her campaign signs that were proudly placed in many yards throughout the city. As I placed my vote for mayor I took this promise into consideration. I must now ask myself how we (we being collectively) voted in a “full-time” mayor and now not even a year later council is looking into the possibility of cutting meetings in half at the suggestion of Mayor Hawkins?
I know that members of council don’t get rich by serving on council. However, if this council decides to cut their already part time hours even further I would suggest that council be willing to get rid of health benefits for themselves along with any salary that is available to them.
One last thought. The city manager created a budget without a tax increase. Council had other ideas for the budget and requested that Mr. Rockovich create a second budget. Once again council had other ideas and yet again requests that Mr. Rockovich create a third budget except this time he must miraculously come up with $80,000. Why is council hiding behind Mr. Rockovich and requiring him to come up with the remaining monies needed? Isn’t it council’s job to look at the budget created by the city manager, see where it can tweaked and then request that Mr. Rockovich create the budget that council has adjusted? So now we have 4 budgets out there (including Councilman Mehlburgers) that council can’t seem to agree upon and yet we want to cut the number of meetings that council has to deliberate on matters such as these?
John, I’m confused and hoping that you can shed some light on these things for me.
Outsider,
Although I can not speak for Mayor Hawkins, the assumption I made was that she was making a commitment to work full time to the benefit of the city as mayor. She is able to do this because she is retired and has a great love for the city. And she does do this. She is a full time champion for the city, and then some.
I never took her campaign comments to mean she was going to be in an office or attending meetings eight or more hours a day, only that she was going to be a full time champion. In fact, we are an optional form of government under the Third Class City Code and our chief executive or COO is the city manager.
Furthermore, Mayor Hawkins was not the first to suggest we go to fewer meetings per month. That is something I brought up in individual discussions with the mayor, at least on other member of city council and the city manager some time ago. I suspect others also raised questions about this. The mayor took the initiative to look into the possibilities, discuss it with the city manager and come back with a suggestion.
There are several reasons I thin fewer meetings a month are beneficial. One, it takes a significant amount of staff time to prepare for meetings. We can improve efficiency by having fewer meetings.
Secondly, I personally think council can work more efficiently with fewer meetings by being better prepared and having more time between meetings to individually work out our thoughts.
As for the salary and benefits issue, not a single person in their right mind would run for council because of the salary and/or benefits. It simply isn’t worth it. Having said that, there ought to be some reimbursement for what is involved. It is much more than attending council meetings.
(As a side note – I think I’m losing money this year from my council position. As members of council we are constantly hit up for community donations because of our position representing the city. I think I’ve more than lost my council “salary” to this.)
Now, to respond to your budget question or comment, what you are questioning is in my mind the very nature of developing a final budget. You come up with scenarios (a proposed budget) and go from there. You keep doing that until you have a budget that you adopt. Is every step a new budget? I suppose it could be considered that, but I don’t know how else to do it.
I think the city manager deserves a great deal of credit for coming in with an original proposal that was balanced with the exception of the three add-ons wanted by council – increased money for paving, emergency demolition and economic development.
Council directed the manager to reduce expenditures wherever he could to find more money for those add-ons without a tax increase. The manager rather emphatically said he was not comfortable with that, but he has responded to our request.
I am a bit uncomfortable with that request. I’ve always been rather fiscally conservative, believing it is best to plan towards the higher end of your likely expenses and a somewhat lower end of your anticipated income. I don’t like to discover shortfalls down the road.
Of course the Mayor's full-time commitment didn't have anything to do with sitting in council meetings. She just obviously has more time personally to devote.
I suspect the the OC outsider didn't really vote for her either and more than likely has an axe to grind for some reason. Possibly they ran for office and lost?
It's hard for the tax payer to comment on the budget when we can't see the actual income and expenses. I don't see a little pressure from council on the manager or some insightful questions as being out of line. Iron sharpens iron and we are not in a position to just make assumptions all that can be cut has been cut.
I don't want to pay higer R.E. taxes but who the heck does. Maybe the idea of increased utility fees is more equitable. I don't know that, but if we absolutely need more revenue let's try to spread it around more.
I am leaving shortly and will be out of town for the week. Obviusly, I will be unable to attend this evening's budget session.
If the opportunity allows, I will try to update this discussion over the next few days. However, there are no guarantees.
John
Howdy John, just wanted to say..
Dear anonymous you can rest assured that I have not now nor have I ever ran for a public office. Must be a case of mistaken identity. I don't envy anyone in these thankless positions. If nothing else my sympathies go out to them. Also, please be informed that the budget is available for all to see at the library or at City Hall.
Have a nice vacation John.
Panel of One,
I appreciated your comment, but I don't want this blog to possibly inflame something that might or might not exist.
Please give me a call.
John
Hi John. I hope you enjoyed the holidays. I miss hearing from you! I'm curious how things are progressing with the Main Street Program. It seemed to have a lot of promise.
With all the billions being spent on bailouts, it's a shame there isn't a pool of money available for City's like O.C. wanting to turn things around.
I hope to help as I can in '09. I'm getting tired of hearing outsiders or newcomers say how wonderful Franklin is and how unimpressed they are with O.C. Nothing against Franklin, it is like a postcard, I just want to see O.C. become something we can all be proud of.
Both of the business associations truly made an effort to improve our surroundings and it is a thankless job. Kudos to all of them!
I do think we need somthing like the Main Street program to coordinate efforts. I would also like to see someone from the ORA address Council and let the residents know what they have planned for O.C. in 2009. They have more resources and employees than any other organization currently. I just feel like no one really knows what they have planned or at least it's not being communicated well. I would volunteer to assist them if I knew what they planned to do for O.C. specifically.
Just some thoughts - have a great 2009!
John,
I'm just wondering how you feel now about having the City Manager add the $80,000 to the budget at the end of the budget talks. Just a reminder that $80,000 was added mostly through adjusting what the City Manager thought revenue would be for the city. The Mayor and Council pushed him to do this mind you. I'm asking this because snow removal and salting, and traction spread was way over cost and if you think I'm missing something here look at your copy of the budget and look at what the city paid for snow removal. Oil City was on a very tight line as it was and unless the revised revenues do come into play, (and who knows what other unexpected costs there will be) the budget as it stands isn't going to cover us. So, was adding $80,000 to the budget in the best interest of the city?
I had reservations when council as a body asked that of the manager and when the budget was given final approval.
I have reservations now.
I suspect before the year is out we are going to be moving some money around and some things planned won't get done.
I hope I'm wrong.
Post a Comment