At The Dec. 17 Town Council Meeting, during the budget status presentation, a few points were brought up by Stacey Lemos, OV Finance Director.
Compared to the last fiscal year, Ms. Lemos noted that our sales tax revenue is down by 8.8%, our interest income is down a whopping 60.5% (due in part to the Lehman Brothers situation) building permits are at 200, below the projected number of 250 and there will be no Grant Revenue from the state.
As such, we were wondering what, if anything any of our astute readers may suggest that might be helpful as the town goes through these difficult economic times we are all facing.
I'm sure any suggestions would be appreciated by those in our town government that are frequent readers of the blog.
Although not too many of us would like to see a property tax, or for that matter, an increase in our sales tax, these may be options. Our poll (presently on top left column of blog) on the Utility Tax shows the majority wish to have it expire, but there are some that believe keeping it has merit. None of these may be palatable, but they may be options.
Here's your chance. Come up with some good ideas, if you can.
16 comments:
There are many ways to increase revenue. Most of them will be met with strong resistance for the same reason the park was defeated. It effects our own wallet. But for the record, I would be in favor of allowing the utility tax to be extended 1 year.
So I would like to see us look at ways we can decrease Town expenses without cutting services at this time.
The obscene pay increase that the Town Manager received should be postponed indefinitely. The Town Council should forfiet their pay for at least one year. Town staff should have to pay for a portion of their health insurance. It is now free to them. All cost of living increases should be suspended leaving merit pay alone.
All assistant director positions should be eliminated (to include the Asst. Town Manager (even though Ms. Watson has done a great job.). The 'Management Assistant' position to the Town Manager should be elininated. The legal staff (attorneys) on the civil side can EASILY be cut by one person and I would be happy to offer up a name. :-) The library could close one day per week. All town publications that can legally be placed on line should be put on line.
Lastly, the Town should seriously look at closing all offices 1 day a week until such time as the sales tax revenues are meeting or exceeding the budgeted amounts.
This IS a revenue increasing idea. Our Town needs to be far more business friendly. There is a reason building permits are down and it is not just 'the economy'.
And here is my humor side coming out.......we might take a look at returning to the 5 member Town Council. Let's elininate anyone whose last name ends in "r". We will save money and the meetings should be shorter.......well maybe the latter wouldn't happen.
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYONE!!!!
In case Cox doesn't know it, a major drain on our revenue are those ridiculous giveaways that he continues to support.
As it concerns our Town Manager, I'll reiterate what I said at the podium at the last council meeting: "Our community is fortunate to have a man like David Andrews working for us."
As for Cox's attempt at humor, that was almost as funny as a funeral.
I guess one shouldn't be surprised at anything he says.
All Hail...'The Art' has spoken. One of these days you will get over your self importance.
Art...Tell us how much "those ridiculous giveaways" have cost Oro Valley. Obviously you know the numbers. Share them with us.
I didn't say we were not fortunate to have David Andrews. He is just being paid too much money.....primarily because of one of the "r" council members.
Okay, Mayor ends with an "R", but I thought that About ended witha "T".
I realize my response here doesn't add anything to the question I posed, but I think it worth noting.
KC CarteR was elected & reelected. Bill GarneR was elected by a landslide in the primary.
Don Cox came up empty in four tries to get elected.
Perhaps that's one reason why he finds fault with those who serve us with class, dignity & intelligence.
Interestingly, the comments here (although not many) focus on reducing expenditures rather than answering the original question about generating additional revenues.
Of course, either way you approach the question, there would be savings. But I fear that the overly-simplified suggestions by OVOT do not begin to touch the enormity of the budget issue.
Every budget contains only two elements: things and people. If you need to maintain the "things" so that they work properly, then there's not much to be cut there. And if you cut the "people," then you run the risk of not being prepared to bring experienced people on board when the economy picks up again.
So, yes, we can ask top leaders to return some of their wages, but in a $100 million budget, that doesn't amount to much.
Let's go back to the original question: Where can additional revenue be generated? Ideas anyone?
Good morning. I just want to add one point of correction to a posting here: Town employees do not receive their health insurance at no cost; we pay a portion of the premiums each month, based on plan selection.
Happy holidays!
The beauty of democracy is that it allows for me to be all about me -zc
MY THREE CENTS
I first wish to fault OVOT's first paragraph in that, from my discussions with others relative to the Town Site Park, it's defeat wasn't so much due to the money aspect as it was due to:
1) The 'Park' appeared to be a special interest concept.
2) As designed, it did not reflect the character of Oro Valley.
3) As designed it would have interfered with 'the lay of the land' and would NOT have been integral with it.
4) The primary fields 'problem' could be best served by updating, improving, and 'opening to use' existing facilities.
PEOPLE BUY THINGS THAT THEY WANT, NOT WHAT THEY NEED, AND THEY BUY THEM WHEN THEY WANT THEM MORE THAN THEY WANT THE MONEY THAT IT COSTS - Zig Ziglar. The people didn't want THAT park more than the money that it would cost.
Now, as to the extension of the utility tax: our utilities, in the past few years, and, by necessity, will increase even further WITHOUT THE PERPETUATION AND/OR EXTENSION OF THE PRESENT TAX. Why not enact an additional tax on cokes, candy, popcorn, cigars, cigarettes, kleenex, toiletpaper, and so forth as was similarly proposed by the mayor of New York? I suppose it's because people who use the above have choices of use whereas we have no where else to turn to in order to fulfill our utility needs; we're trapped in a cage in a zoo.
SO, LETS GET REAL! If so many of the communities in this country have found the need to downsize and economize AND ARE DOING IT, why do some in Oro Valley think we're above it all? How about an across the board percentage cut for each and every department within Oro Valley? I find it kind of interesting that, when my wife worked as a budget coordinator for the County of Wake in North Carolina, many years ago, an edict was proclaimed to 'cut the expenditures, cut staff, cut whatever and, lo and behold, her own department which had a budget director, 3 budget analysts, and her (the coordinator), reduced it's highly paid analysts down to 1, and, guess what, just her department alone learned to operate more efficiently, actually improved it's performance, and saved the county approximately $200,000/year; other departments followed suit. So, b-b, I cannot give credence absolute to your statement relative to [people and things]. OVOT has makes a good point in that he does emphasize the idea of cutting operational expenses within the Town; but, he might be a little too 'eager' in his attempts at pointedly naming those areas where diminished expenses should be executed though I, however, perhaps hypocritically, will name one myself: NO MORE UNNECESSARY CONSULTANTS, PLEASE!!
Remember, when you find 'ways' to generate more income for a political subdivision, in this day and age you are most probably going to pave that way by REDUCING the income of the ordinary citizen.
OVOT, that the building permits are down not JUST because of the weak economy is a bit misleading; the economy IS the PRIMARY reason for that so please don't try to dilute that factor. Oro Valley will never become a metropolis while the rest of the country
is as, or more, hungry and 'available' than we are!
Well, for now, for me, enough said - fa la la la la, la la la la. Happy holidays everyone and may the new year bring us back to the future.
Thanks to Mary Davis for correcting one of the many erroneous statements by Cox, who has a knack of misrepresenting the facts.
Not to over-simplify, Zev, but--yes--every budget is made up of people or things. In your wife's case, they were able to save money by reducing people (and, by extension, perhaps the things that they used).
So, things include road improvements, police vehicles, park maintenance, library acquisitions, etc., etc. We could choose to reduce those some more, and/or we could reduce people costs through pay cuts, freezing positions, etc. All of these have been considered or are taking place.
But to save millions (which is what we're talking about here), there would have to be a huge cut in projects, ongoing programs and personnel costs.
Still,I haven't seen any viable suggestions for increasing revenue (the operative word being "viable"--OVOT notwithstanding).
How about the library, we already pay taxes to the county for the library system maybe until the economy improves we can go back under having the county run the library, just a thought.
Like Zev mentioned consider a freeze on non-essential hiring, spending, etc
Give each dept head the job of cutting expenses by xyz%, I believe you will see some cuts if a manager has to decide between jobs or doing without either a raise or perk or new equipment
A position is vacated by retirment or other reasons, leave it vacant unless it is absolutely essential, say public safety
Govrnment needs to live within its budget just like most of us do
Consider a time off type plan where employees can take off some time without pay, I know that is not a big savingsm, but it all adds up it adds up
Nice going "mscoyote.". Good suggestions.
How many of us realize having the library under the auspices of OV is a substantial drain on our finances. Allowing Pima County to take it over may not "sit well" with some, but talk about saving big bucks---that's one way.
Another issue to look into is the operation of our Police Dep't. Under the leadership of Chief Danny Sharp, OV is certainly a safe community. However, there are those that realize changes in the operation and procedures of the department can save us a substantial amount of money without impacting our safety.
Who knows? Before we finish with this posting, we may come up with a few ideas that might be implemented. All we can do is try.
another thought maybe have a program that allows the town citizens and or staff to come up with some idea's to save money;. Then a cash award of say?? can be made to the employee or citizen,a little cash is is a good incentive in my opinion.
ok, maybe something can be done or revised with that new town building going up in Rancho Vistoso, can that be temporarily put on hold?
Unless there is a real incentive for town officials to save money or cut expenses, it will be business as usual
At this time, decreasing expenses IS the fastest way of increasing revenue. Yes, there are things that we must continue to fund but eliminating those that are not MUSTS is possible. B-b, I have seen this done, and read about it being done in MANY other places and if THEY can do it why not US? Certainly, our federal government has no problem, they simply print more money, more thin air, and add more deficit. I don't think we can follow that example. More taxation? People are on the edge right now and I would hate to see them pushed over it.
It's about time everyone takes a good gander at the overall picture facing this WORLD and learn to dissect it, try to deal with it, try to understand it. If you can't get at the basic truth that throwing money at a given problem doesn't necessarily fix it, then we're all in for a wild and bumpy ride. For more than a decade we've been living in a whirlwind of excess; now we must face reality, trim down to our bare necessities, and learn to deal with that FACT!
How about sueing Vestar for the damage done to the water system. Shoot, sue them for the entire $23 million for the upscale Wal-Mart BS.
One comment I left out, b-b, in the instance I cited relative to my wife's department, by reducing staff they were 'forced' to become more efficient. Their end product was no less than the one produced by more employees. And, in fact, year after year they received national awards for the results. I would add also that they were able to accomplish this without adding hours to their work time.
Post a Comment