Proposals and Background Information

Jack Humphreville Suggests:

City recognizes it has a problem

Need for major operational, organizational and financial restructuring

Forms a Municipal Assistance Corporation and Emergency Financial Control Board

Requires a real balanced budget: no deferrals, Sustainable Funding, etc

Private Citizens Just like NYC

 
Hire a seasoned executive to oversee the operations of the City

This will mean head count reduction, outsourcing, less services.

Massive bond offering to finance pension, infrastructure, etc. to be paid out over time with dedicated revenue stream

Need vote.

Doug Epperhart suggests the following items:

(1)    Resolved, LANCC endorses establishing a financially-sound, two-tiered pension system for public safety and civilian employees (including DWP) and supports efforts to have a pension plan ready in time for voter consideration at the June 8 election.


(2)    Resolved, LANCC endorses eliminating the city’s business tax based on gross receipts and proposes that one based on business net income and/or number of employees and providing a tiered-structure favoring small businesses (less than 50 employees and/or $10 million annual income) be established.


(3)    Resolved, LANCC proposes that the fiscal year 2010-11 city clerk funding for neighborhood council elections be eliminated and the councils conduct their own elections.


(4)    Resolved, LANCC proposes that all city funds for travel be reduced by 90 percent in fiscal year 2010-11.


(5)    Resolved, LANCC proposes that salaries of the Board of Public Works members be eliminated.


(6)    Resolved, LANCC proposes that city revenue task force, including members appointed by neighborhood councils, be established to examine current city revenue sources and recommend ways to improve the city’s revenue generating structure, including any and all means and methods that produce income.

Adrienne O'Niell Suggests:

The Sunday meeting must stay on point, and that point is the city budget.  We are already late getting into the game since the city has been working on this for some time already.  We are going to be in a catch up position as is.  We need not complicate matters further.  NC funding will also be dependent on what we do, which makes it further down the list and a very good topic for another meeting.  There is nothing to be done at this point on our funding.  And, I think we all know that we are going to take another hit.  When we call a special meeting, we need to attend to that business, period.

We know what is wrong.  We just need to come up with a better way to fix it.  This meeting should be about setting up an accounting task force who will delve into the city departments, the city council, the mayors office, and any other financial entities that suck from the pig (us).  It will be up to the task force to set the assignments and the duties that will, hopefully, bring us some answers and a better budget.  To do that, we need our brightest minds, not our biggest mouths.  How can you put a specific plan on the floor until you know EXACTLY what you are dealing with?  The plan should be for the task force to get into the trenches, discussing briefly with personnel in addition to managers what a dept. needs to stay operational to some degree and to cut where ever it makes sense to cut.  There are decisions to be made such as, does it make more sense financially to purchase new equipment or keep the old running.  You don’t find this information in the CAOs office or at the Hollywood Constituency Center.  All suggestions are, of course, welcome.  However, I don’t want this meeting to veer off into never-never land.  Then again, how much value are suggestions from someone who has never seen a balance sheet or had to prepare a budget?  Suggestions can always be emailed to the task force.  Suggestions from Bob such as cutting council members salaries by 40% and the mayor’s deputies to 9 are great suggestions and should definitely be considered.  As should the city council slush funds and the cars, etc.  I further suggest that there be no votes at this time since we really have no concrete numbers to validate the votes.  We need to turn the task force loose, allow them time to complete their work, and then bring their suggestions back to LANCC for a vote.  Let us not get the cart before the horse.  Again, this must be a good effort based upon sound accounting principles.  Otherwise we are just shooting into the air and pulling suggestions out of our behinds.  Let us do this in a good professional manner that leaves no doubt in the city that we have done our work and that it stands on sound principles.

Adrienne Also Argues the following:

First of all, you all need to understand that I am not proposing that we tweak a few items in the budget.  Second, how can you all propose changes when you don’t have the information that is needed to make financial decisions?  If we want to be taken seriously, we absolutely MUST do our homework.  We must be able to substantiate every single one of our proposals with numbers to back it up.  We must leave no doubt in the minds of the city that we know what we are talking about.  That is why I have proposed a financial task force that will gather the information and put it together in a manner that absolutely proves we have done our homework.  If we take on the budget in any other way, we stand to be laughed out of the room.

A financial task force will take two to three months of heavy duty work to dig out places to cut and revenue to be raised.  They will then present the results of their work to LANCC and it is up to the NCs what to push and where to push.  Since the task force will be made up of financial NC people from all over the city, there can be no thoughts that this is the “original people” who are putting the information together.  This type of a project cannot and should not be undertaken and settled in a one day discussion group.  It is a very serious task and one that will prove once and for all (we hope) that we are not just a bunch of people who sit around and talk about stuff.  I, for one, do not want to be asked to make financial decisions unless I have seen the numbers supporting such a move.  Not even on the pension funds problem.  I have heard much talk and many proposals, but I have yet to see any numbers that will back up any of these proposals.  Until we have those numbers in our hands, we are just whistling in the wind.  Put another way, Dan would not operate without having the Xrays and Len would not prepare a brief without legal precedents.  Ken would check his facts before printing, etc.  So, why do you think you can take on the budget without any serious analysis?

I am willing to put in long hours and even take a few days off during tax season to see that this project is done correctly.  Unless we do, we are living in never-never land.  I am not certain that I want to be involved in motions that are not supported by facts.  And when it comes to the budget, I want to see the facts.

I hope I am making the case for NC involvement in the budget process as an intelligent and thoughtful endeavor, rather than a knee jerk reaction to a bunch of unsubstantiated motions.  Having made my living in numbers, I have a healthy respect for them.  I am also aware that a task force will not have the time necessary for a thorough analysis, however there is time for overviews and good preliminary analysis.  I have been working on setting out an overview of what I think needs to be looked at by a task force.  I should have something to present on Sunday to support my position.  I ask that you all consider what is at stake here before you rush to push through motions that will get us nowhere near where we need to be.  Just one item to be considered – is the city investing their overnight funds?  If not, there is revenue to be raised by this action.  But how would we know unless we delved into the numbers and asked the right questions?  This is just one instance, and there are many more.  So, please consider carefully what you propose to do.  Our credibility is on the line.  And this is why I want the press involved.  This way we can prove that we are of value to the city, and the city will know it.

Bob Gelfand Suggests:

1. We call on the City Council to take voluntary 40 percent salary reductions as long as the city is in this condition of financial peril. They presided over the disaster, they are going to be laying people off, and they should be sharing in the sacrifice. The mayor and the mayor's staff should also take voluntary cuts of at least 30 percent.
   
2. The bloated staff in the mayor's office should be reduced substantially. Our financial task force will be able to offer recommendations, but reducing the number by half is a reasonable target.
3. City employees should agree to salary cuts according to the proposal originally presented by Dr Dan Wiseman, namely that employees making more than $150,000 per year take the highest percentage cut, with graded steps for those making less. This is a partial alternative to layoffs and further rounds of furloughs.
4. The seniority system for avoiding furloughs and layoffs should be abolished for new hires, and abolished to the extent available by law for current employees.