6:00am Reporting by Greggory Moore | “We are here to say that enough is enough. We believe that it is important to protect the core services that provide both public safety and quality of life.” – Councilmember Rae Gabelich
A press conference was held August 23 by Councilmembers Rae Gabelich, Gerrie Schipske, and Steve Neal to discuss the trio’s “Public Safety and Quality of Life Protection Plan,” which outlines how the $18–20 million1 currently in the Uplands Oil Fund should be utilized to “restore some of the most severe cuts to our budget with funds that the city already has in hand.”
But roughly six hours later the proposal, advanced as a motion by Neal during a city council budget hearing, was dead on arrival, with Mayor Bob Foster calling the proposal “irresponsible,” City Manager Pat West sparring with Schipske over whether revenue from the Fund has ever been used as the trio proposed to use it, and Neal eventually withdrawing his motion entirely.
The Schipske/Gabelich/Neal plan proposed to allocate the Fund as follows:
• $6.2 million to the Police Department, restoring 14 patrol officers, plus positions to the Gang Enforcement Field Team, the Violent Crimes Detail, and the Homeland Security Section; as well as providing Chief Jim McDonnell with about $3.2 million in discretionary monies
• $4.3 million to the Fire Department, allowing it to maintain four-person staffing on all fire engines, restoring the fire engine to Station 18, and restoring Rescue 12
• $750,000 each to Library Services and the Department of Parks, Recreation & Marine
• $4 million for various “one-time expenditures.”2
“[T]his is money that’s in hand, and we think this is a fair and sensible and responsible way to utilize this money, [as opposed to spending it] on other types of projects,” Schipske said during the noontime press conference, later citing as an example a proposed $600,000 redesign of the City’s Website that was agendized for the city council meeting that evening (and eventually passed by a 7-2 vote). “At the time when we are cutting services, we don’t need to be taking on new projects. We need to restore the services that are being cut.”
But at the budget hearing Foster vociferously objected to the proposal. “This is very dangerous territory,” he said, “and it is irresponsible. … In effect, if you adopted this motion … if that oil revenue doesn’t materialize, you’ve doubled the deficit for next year. … Quite frankly, that’s what got us in the problems we’re in. And I know it sounds great, I know it may play to certain groups, but it is just not responsible to do this.”
Gabelich called Foster’s statement that the proposal played to certain groups — by which she understood Foster to mean unions — “offensive. … This is not a union thing; this is about what we do to preserve the core services in Long Beach.”
Gabelich then referred to a memo issued earlier in the day by West that projected the Fund to have the same surplus next year as it does this year year. “The very least we could be doing with the $19.8 million (I believe it is) is to use $12 million to restore the public safety cuts that are proposed, then take the other $4 million and put it aside to smoothing out the problems,” she said. “Then next year if the city manager is accurate and we have another $19 million surplus, then we’ve got $23 million in the bank to deal with [budgetary problems].”
But Foster pointed to the unpredictability of oil prices, citing as an example 2008–09, when the City budgeted for ongoing oil revenues of $85 per barrel and the price dipped to $30 per barrel. “If that should happen even remotely … you have substantially increased the deficit for next year,” he said. “The principle we’ve established in our financial policy is to use [revenue from Fund profits] above $55 [per barrel] is to use it for one-time expenditures.”
Foster also objected to the timing of the trio’s press conference — calling it “folly” — since it came in the middle of negotiations with the fire and police unions. “The timing was very poor,” he said, “very poor.”
Councilmember Gary DeLong, in stating his intent to oppose Neal’s motion, said he found it “a little crazy” to be discussing a proposal contingent upon “pension reform that doesn’t exist yet.”
Then DeLong turned to West, who had stated earlier that if the trio’s proposal were adopted, the City’s deficit, currently projected to be $14 million deficit, would in fact be $26 million. “So basically these cuts are going to happen,” DeLong queried West. “It’s not a matter of ‘if’ — it’s a matter of saying: ‘Should they happen in October 2011, or should they happen October 2012?'”
“Correct,” West answered. “That’s one way to say it.”
At roughly this point Neal withdrew his motion, effectively ending the discussion.
*
Earlier in the day, Capt. Rich Brandt, president of the Long Beach Firefighters Association, spoke of the danger of the cuts to the Fire Department in the Fiscal Year 2012 Proposed Budget. “These cuts would … put the lives of our firefighters and citizens at risk,” he said.
While under the Schipske/Gabelich/Neal plan the Police and Fire Departments would have received the bulk of the $16 million, also discussed were redressing what Gabelich called the “drastic reduction in programs available to our young people” by funding what Schipske referred to as the “safety net provided by libraries and Parks & Recreation services.”
Sarah Pillet, executive director of the Long Beach Library Foundation, called libraries “a preventative measure” that helps keep children out of trouble. “[Libraries] are in a virtual partnership with police. … We need to invest in libraries so we don’t have to invest [in the criminal justice system] later on. … A library is about more than just checking out book. A library is a vital public service.”
Of the proposed cuts to library services, Pillet said, “To us, this sounds like the beginning of the end.”
“Budgets are moral documents,” Gabelich said, relaying a quote she said she has taped to her computer. “They reveal your priorities and values.”
The next city council closed session budget discussion is scheduled for September 6, and the City must adopt the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget by September 15.
—
1The figures quoted have ranged from $18 million to $19.8 million.
2The proposal would keep $2 million in the Fund, which, according to the press statement, is “twice the amount that the Gas Department Manager has stated is a prudent reserve balance for the fund.”
“Public Safety and Quality of Life Protection Plan”
Fiscal Year 2012 Proposed Budget