[Ang]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/0...e1937929573.txt

City budget: No raises for 3rd straight year

By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:34 PM CDT

MICHIGAN CITY — Mayor Chuck Oberlie has unveiled a proposed 2011 budget that includes no pay increases for city employees for the third year.

According to the mayor’s proposal, the lack of a raise is because of Common Council-mandated reductions in Riverboat funds and a projected decrease in property tax revenue.

“We regret that this budget again contains no adjustments to salaries and wages,” said a letter from the mayor and Controller John Schaefer. “If conditions and predictions change, it is possible that we may revisit this matter during 2011.”

The letter outlines changes ahead at the Transit Department. Evening bus service will end after a grant to provide the service expires on Sept. 30. Three positions will be eliminated. Transit director Walter Gipson is retiring Sept. 1.

The superintendent of Central Services position will not be refilled after the current holder of that position, Jim Elwell, retires this year.

Instead, the current positions of Central Services office manager, Street Department director and transit director will be elevated to department head status, resulting in a savings of $44,000.

The mayor’s budget proposes using $2.6 million of riverboat funds to subsidize the general fund. That represents 25 percent of riverboat revenues.

The mayor said Friday the depressed economy, changes in Indiana’s tax structure and the city’s decision to limit use of riverboat funds for operating expenses necessitated the freeze in wages.

“What we’re trying to do is preserve as best we can the job opportunities to provide the services that are necessary in the community,” he said.

Council President Marc Espar said Friday he thinks employees deserve raises.

“I think it’s a very bad move,” said Espar, of the mayor’s decision. “I think city employees deserve a raise, and I think it is incumbent on the mayor to bring our cost in line in order for city employees to receive a raise.”

He said there is waste in city government and that if it were eliminated than city employees could be given a raise at the same time the budget could be cut.

The mayor said that his budget continues to reduce the number of city employees.

[Tim]

I wrote this in the comments section of the ND -

" City employees, in effect, work for an entity that isn't bringing in enough money to give them raises. Whether they "deserve" a raise isn't the question. I work for a company that is struggling in today's economy. As such I full well understand why it's been years since I received a raise. Michigan City can't afford to hand out raises. City employees are, I'm sure, given every opportunity to quit if they do not want to work for the salary offered. "

I'm sure there are a lot of city employees that are working hard. But it's just a plain fact in today's economy that the city cannot afford to hand out raises. Everyone takes it in the shorts. As I said above, I haven't received a raise in years, but I know exactly why. I still have a good job and get paid every month - considering how many people all over the world not only have no job but slim hope of ever finding one I feel fortunate.

[mcstumper]

According to this:

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/infla...nflation-rates/

2009 inflation was -0.4%. So technically, a cost-of-living adjustment would have meant a 0.4% pay cut. City employees therefore actually got a raise...

[Johnny Rush]

Councilman Espar at the Council Meeting describing his thoughts on the budget as presented from the Mayor:

Seven months ago I sat down with the Mayor and expressed the council’s desire to work with him to develop a budget ordinance that would continue to provide quality services to our residents while complying with the limitations imposed on Riverboat moneys. What I didn’t want to happen was to be presented with a budget report at the last hour and have to rush through a budget ordinance with little or no planning behind it. Unfortunately, the Mayor didn’t take me up on the offer and presented his budget report with minimal time to spare. However, the Council will not shirk its responsibilities and will pass a budget ordinance that provides for vital public services while adhering to fiscal restraint and responsibility.

Last year at this time, the Mayor and the administration attempted to sell this Council on the notion of cutting taxes by spending more, the Council didn’t buy it then, but in effect, gave him a year reprieve on reducing the city’s reliance on Riverboat moneys for operations. It was my hope that the Mayor would use that time to attempt to realign government operations to accomplish that end. It’s unfortunate that he instead used that time to concoct a scheme to create magical revenue to fund his unwillingness to streamline government operations.

When I refer to magical revenue, I’m referring to the more than 2 million dollars of property and other taxes that appear in this year’s budget. At a minimum, it’s magical because it was never there before, but appears when we supposedly need it most, or at it’s most absurd, it’s magical revenue because it’s money that we can spend twice. First when it was raised in 2009 and again in 2011. However, if it truly isn’t magical, but was money raised in 2008-2009, but wasn’t needed in those years for those expenses, then it’s certainly not need in 2011 for expenses, and we should see an expenditure going back to the tax payers with a note of apology for taxing them unnecessarily.

I’m going to go out on a limb, I don’t believe this is magical revenue, but I think it’s make believe. This is a number derived to skirt the need to reduce expenses. It was designed in order to spend money now, with the knowledge that next year, or in two years, or whenever our property tax nightmare is resolved, whoever is Mayor will have to come back to the Council with the unwanted task of asking for Riverboat money to pay for this shortfall.

With that being said, I’m looking forward to a thorough review and analysis of how, or why this revenue should be included in this year’s budget. And if not, where the administration would trim to comply with state and local ordinances. I also look forward to the scheduled meetings where this ordinance will be thoroughly studied. Thank you

[Ang]

According to this:

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/infla...nflation-rates/

2009 inflation was -0.4%. So technically, a cost-of-living adjustment would have meant a 0.4% pay cut. City employees therefore actually got a raise...

I'm sure the City employees don't see it that way....

Especially since the insurance rates have increased in Indiana by an average of 3.4%--At least it's not as bad as Michigan with a 16.1% increase.

[Southsider2k12]

Wow. I gotta take a second and admit I was totally wrong about Espar. I really thought he was a main piece in the taming of the Council in favor of Oberlie. It looked to me like he was going to be another solid and quiet yes vote in favor of the mayor. Espar has really stood up on a few issues and led the way very nicely.

[Ang]

I would say he is listening to the voice of the people and has realized that is the way to get reelected.

[edgeywood]

I would say he is listening to the voice of the people and has realized that is the way to get reelected.

I'd say he is an opportunist that sees a chance to advance himself at Oberlie's expense. He started standing up to the mayor when it became politically advantageous.

[Ang]

Pretty much what I was saying, just trying to be PC

[Southsider2k12]

I'd say he is an opportunist that sees a chance to advance himself at Oberlie's expense. He started standing up to the mayor when it became politically advantageous.

Well that is still better than I expected... And it is better than some others on that council.

[Tim]

Regarding my comment, perhaps there's info I'm not aware of. Like if someone just F'ed up with the budget/money and that's why raises aren't forthcoming.... anyone got the inside track on that?

Still, though, I have to wonder how many of the city employees complaining about no raises have done ANYTHING to make upper management sit up and say hey we need to give this guy more money! I get this all the time from guys I used to teach with in Hollywood. Guys that have been there years and years - "They don't show their appreciation!" Really? Did you get paid last week? There you go.

I'm sure both side have legit gripes - but the idea that you deserve more money because you've been there a while is absurd.

[mcstumper]

I'm sure the City employees don't see it that way....

Especially since the insurance rates have increased in Indiana by an average of 3.4%--At least it's not as bad as Michigan with a 16.1% increase.

I know it is an unpopular concept, but regardless of how people see it, unchanged pay in a period of deflation is equivalent to a raise, or put another way, a raise in your standard of living.

If inflation were 10%, it would have the exact same standard of living impact as a person getting a 10.4% pay increase.

Oh, and medical costs (ie. insurance) is included in the CPI which means other areas had to have an even more dramatic decrease to bring the index into negative territory.

[Homey]

The city employees get paid very well and their insurance is excellent. Too bad the rates have gone up for them, they have gone up for everyone and we all have to bite the bullet and help pay for the increases. If the Mayor had made budget adjustments prior to this year's budget, he may have been able to give a small raise to employees.