Can you believe it?
The buzz around city hall about the "assessment" is so loud, you practically can hear it on Hellenberg island.
Apparently, a copy has been making the rounds in advance of a public unveiling and it's shaking up a lot of people.
I've just picked up bits and pieces and I don't know if any of it's true, but it sounds like -
The fire department is going to lose some people.
The police department will lose at least one officer post.
The assistant city manager job will cease to exist.
The clerk/treasurer spot discontinued (can they really do that?)
The receptionist is out the door again.
A planner post is being cut.
Some merging of departments is planned.
Some DPS jobs will be privatized.
The city council will be dissolved.
I'm told these are just a few ideas. Are any of them good?
Apparently, a copy has been making the rounds in advance of a public unveiling and it's shaking up a lot of people.
I've just picked up bits and pieces and I don't know if any of it's true, but it sounds like -
The fire department is going to lose some people.
The police department will lose at least one officer post.
The assistant city manager job will cease to exist.
The clerk/treasurer spot discontinued (can they really do that?)
The receptionist is out the door again.
A planner post is being cut.
Some merging of departments is planned.
Some DPS jobs will be privatized.
The city council will be dissolved.
I'm told these are just a few ideas. Are any of them good?
posted by The Observer at 6/22/2007 09:09:00 AM
16 Comments:
Whatever the "assessment" says is a good guide to start right sizing this city. Why should taxpayers have to pay for two people when one will be sufficient? There is alot of waste that I have personally seen, and I would rather have my taxes pay for infrastructure and captial improvements than for duplicate employees. We will just have to wait and see what the actual report says, and see how deep it cuts. The only one I would question is the clerk/treasurer position. Don't we have to have that?
Not if you change the charter, you don't.
My complaint with the assessment is it doesn't cut deep enough. Its a good start, but thats about it.
Seems like the consultant went just far enough to balance the budget.
I hope someone gave IACO a copy so he can tell Floraday and Compora what to think.
Sounds as if you've seen it? What cuts does it actually have, and why is it not cutting deep enough? Sounds like you are saying it cut what, about a million?
Changing the charter would take a vote, would it not? If that cut is recommended, when would it be made, this election year, or in two years? Please post more information from the report if you have it or have seen it.
Well, believe it or not, it says exactly what the city manager told it to say. Kind of funny that the savings is almost exactly what the city will need to pay into the pension fund in the next few years, but at the cost of hard working, loyal employees.
What about the hard working loyal taxpayers. Why should they enable overspending on labor costs which can be cut? It's not like anyone is just getting canned for the hell of it. Hopefully this assessment took a thorough approach at saving money at a time when money needs to be saved. Everyone had it very good for many years, but every major business is cutting back at the same time. It's not just a coincidence. Times are tough and seem to be getting tougher, and it is good to see the city making minor cuts instead of going in deeper later, and then have to make a mass layoff. It will be tough for a few, but in the long run this is needed.
Does anyone know how much this assesment cost the tax payers of Monroe. I heard we paid around 100,000 dollars to have someone else tell us we need to cut jobs to make the budget? If this is true, what are the current members of council and city staff doing? Aren't they supposed to balance the budget? It appears to illustrate again just how inept our city leaders are in running our city. Seems to me if you took the money spent on the report, the money spent to send everyone to Hawia, the attorney fees to fight Monroe Tranfer, and all the money wasted on what appears to be an overstaffed city, we could have kept something important open, like a SCHOOL!!!!!! Am I crazy or are we getting screwed around every corner?
Does anyone know how much this assesment cost the tax payers of Monroe. I heard we paid around 100,000 dollars to have someone else tell us we need to cut jobs to make the budget? If this is true, what are the current members of council and city staff doing? Aren't they supposed to balance the budget? It appears to illustrate again just how inept our city leaders are in running our city. Seems to me if you took the money spent on the report, the money spent to send everyone to Hawia, the attorney fees to fight Monroe Tranfer, and all the money wasted on what appears to be an overstaffed city, we could have kept something important open, like a SCHOOL!!!!!! Am I crazy or are we getting screwed around every corner?
The study cost approximately $75,000. The reason for the study was to get an unbiased look at the operations of the city. By choosing to do this, the city council is making the decision to make appropriate cuts in an effort to save money while saving services the residents deserve for their money. This also is being done in an effort to balance the books, without "biting the bullet" and raising taxes. Now comes the hard part, which is the implementation of the study.
This study needed to be done because none of the department heads would be able to cut their own departments, but they can all say how to cut every other department. One option was to simply make the cuts without an assessment. Some of the right moves may have been made, but it may have caused the wrong moves, which could have caused "bumping" from department to department, which could have been quite a mess. The city manager could have done the study, but who would have done his job at that time? This was well organized by the assessment committee and the staff, and it was necessary.
Unfortunately, the last poster has not the understanding that no matter what the city of Monroe does, it does not effect the Monroe Public School Board's decision. Also the budget has nothing to do with the pension board sending board members to training. The only people getting screwed are the taxpayers who are paying to duplicate services within the city employees. The city is finally beginning to run like as business, like it should. No business would survive by wasting money and not trying to solve this problem. My heart goes out to the employees who will lose their jobs, but the taxpayers don't owe them a job, and the city council speaks for the taxpayer, not the employees.
Thank you for the very informed answer to my questions. It can be very frustrating for us who have to work all day, raise a family, and try to keep up with all the issues at hand that may effect our lives. Reduced fire and police protection concerns me. Reducing unwarrented city staff doesn't. Whether the school board or pension board interact with the budget or not seems to be a mute point. What should be the focus is exercising good fiscally responsible policies that are followed throughout Monroes various governmental bodies. I realize the average citizen should not arm chair quarterback every issue, however due to recent events and the state of the union if you will, I think public scrutiny is at a high and for good reason. Maybe the city manager should have put some overtime in and help the city that gainfully employs him save 75k? Money saved is money earned. Running the city like a business means rolling up the sleeves and asking for sacrifice from all. The community doesn't want to hear " who will do the managers job". We want to hear the manager or whoever, did their job and we DID NOT have to spend 75k of the CITIZENS tax dollars to get a report the manager should have done. The manager should manage. Seems to me evaluating the amount of city staff needed is his job anyway? Or am I wrong. If so, who's job is it and why didn't he or she do it? Politicians need to start respecting tax dollars. I'm tired at the end of my day. I did my job, put my kids to bed, and paid my taxes. The people running the city better start doing the same. I'm only asking for what I have to do every day. I have to balance my checkbook. I don't have the ability to raise my income if I run out of money.
Reducing the police and fire a little would not effect anyone in the least bit. Monroe has a terriffic response time, and it will not change.
I have not seen any tax money spent incorrectly sinc the splash park. Where has it occurred?
The politicians felt that this city manager was the best for the job, so let him do his job. His recommendation to perform this study must have been beneficial, or the community members who were chosen for the committee would not have been in agreement. There were union stewards, small business owners, corporate CEO's, and retirees. They took their time and input ideas and areas of concern.
I believe the area of concern would have come into play if the mayor "self directed" the city manager into making cuts. This happened with our former human resources director, Lybic. He was let go because our last mayor and manager felt that his position was not needed. Not long after, guess what, his position was needed. A snap judgement that cost an employee a job, and then his replacement came with less experience and lived in another city, and guess what again, now she's gone after taking another job. That let a city of Monroe resident, who was also a loyal employee, go due to not thinking about what was done. Who is to blame? The city manager or the mayor who directed her? Regardless, this is simply one example. Fact is, the mayor should be hands off when it comes to operations and employee concerns. The manager is the professional and should not be micro-managed by average citizens who get elected. They, by the way, also work hard all day, pay their taxes, and then go to meeting after meeting to make the decisions for everyone. They go to meetings because they are there to learn about things the average "armchair" citizen does not know, and has elected them to vote on. This council seems committed to not raising taxes and are doing what is necessary to provide the services that you and your family expect, while eliminating the waste. Questioning them is fine and expected, when done in a constructive way. I would have to believe that any council member will be willing to listen to any concerns or suggestions. Have you reached out to anyone? Perhaps contacting several councilmembers may be the best. That way you make your statements known to more than just one member. They have email addresses listed on the city's web site.
What do all of you think should be done with the Monroe Recycling lawsuit? Can it be settled to save us losing even more money?
The original topic talked of merging departments, and I have just heard of what may be in the works. I see that a planner position is being cut, and what I've heard is that the former position held by Randy Richardville will be made into a position shared between the Port and the City, and also be the department head for planning. I think that this is a great idea. The entire city needs economic development, not only the port, and I don't believe that the port position is a $100,000 per year position. Hopefully this will bring some development to the following areas: IKO plant, Modern Packaging plant, of course the port of Monroe, downtown, the property on Dixie by the ACE hardware store, and we will certainly need help when ACH closes up. This position could also work on a Marina on the river raisin, who knows. I really hoped for two planner positions cut, since I really don't see what one does, and the other has messed up so bad recently, it seems that she is personally responsible for the Monroe Transfer lawsuit. The one planner who seems to do what he is supposed to is the Community Block Grant guy, although I really think that he could be looking into more grants for the city, to fix the library, roads, infrastructure, and the like.
Privatization of DPS jobs is also a great idea. Noel's Lawn Service could definitely cut grass for a whole lot less than the DPS. Think about it, would you pay a lawn care guy $40 per hour when you can hire another person for $10?
Dissolution of the city council sounds like an interesting idea, Observer. Then we could have a dictator in office who would free spend all of our money all of the time. He could hire his bud to be the city manager and then replace the finance director, so they could transfer funds all around and spend money like water. He could schmooze the DPS so all of his pet projects get done, all the while letting the city's infrastructure crumble. GREAT IDEA!
Maybe we could pay another consultant to advise on whether we need a city council? I for on will volunteer for this task. Since we paid 75k for the last consultant I'll do it for a bargain basement price of 50K. Incidently, I understand we also paid a consultant to work on our zoning code. The same code that has the Monroe Transfer in their lawsuit with the city. Seems to me we have a lot of politicians who need consultants to help make policy. Why have elections? Let the consultants run the city. Opps I forgot, then the politicians wouldn't be able to award all the consultants their high priced contracts. This is how our tax money is spent folks. I'm voting for a change this time around. It can't get any worse, can it?
Could put you back in office John.
That would be worse.
Lame response.....
Post a Comment
<< Home