Friday, September 24, 2010
Return of the Budget
To heck with the return of Hawaii Five-O. We have the Lakewood budget to talk about!
My loyal readers, both of you, will recall I make a big deal about the annual budget process because this is where the city government makes some of its most important decisions. How we as public policymakers spend money says a lot about priorities and strategies to provide the essential services we all expect and need. The decision of what we spend money on is crucial to whatever the city can do to make Lakewood a better place to live and work.
It's no surprise this is a lean budget year, what with the economy in such bad shape. So one does not expect to hear about new programs; one expects to hear about how to preserve what we've got and maybe do things more efficiently and differently.
That said, one cannot leave vision behind. Example: The Lakewood Landmarks board got a preliminary briefing about the Lakewood Colonial Center last night. The good news is that the architectural firm found fewer problems than we expected with the building. But it's still going to be a pricey venture to preserve that building, whoever preserves it. You could argue that's not a problem for the city, but the preliminary discussions raise a challenge and call us to dream: Should the Colonial Center be at the core of a stronger downtown-like neighborhood, and if so, how? What role should the city play in the surroundings of that neighborhood?
In the context of having dreams like this, the 2010 budget process should be a challenge. I encourage people to come by for budget hearings, because you learn a lot of things that no one could fit in one newspaper story or blog post. With that in mind, here's the calendar for this year's budget:
Sept. 27 (Monday): Revenue Workshop. That's a nice way of saying the staff and city advisory groups will present ways we could raise taxes. I'd be stunned, with how almost everyone out there is suffering in this economy, if that happened. But to be thorough, it's a discussion we should at least have. I don't think the voters elected a council that wants to raise taxes, but I've been wrong. Well I was wrong once, think it was 2007. Will have to check my notes :)
Oct. 6 (Wednesday - note there are some special Wednesday workshops) The council will discuss the budgets for planning, economic development, public works, parks and recreation, human services funding and facilities.
By the way, if you think that's too much for one night, you're right. I really wish we were like most cities and had council committees that explored these sorts of important city subjects in more detail. But 'course you've heard me say this before.
Oct. 11: This workshop will be about police and public safety, neighborhood policing and code enforcement, the courts and our legal department.
Oct. 13: This will be a joint session with the council and the chairmen and chairwomen - and any other members who attend - of the city's various citizen advisory committees such as for public safety, parks, roads, etc... For the 'average citizen,' whatever that might mean, this would be a good place to get an overview about the budget, as it will be presented to the advisory groups to get the discussion flowing.
Oct. 25: Another budget workshop.
Nov. 1: Public hearing about the budget.
Nov. 8: Another budget workshop.
And here it gets tricky in terms of calendaring. The 'new' council has been pretty agreeable, and it's possible the budget will get approved on Nov. 15. Or if we run into snags or outright disagreement, that could happen another night. There is a legal requirement the budget for 2011 be approved in 2010.
As with all of these, it's prudent to keep your eye on the city website or other usual sources for when meetings take place and where.
Hope to see you there - and if you can't make it, you'll hopefully hear more about the budget process as it moves along.
Forward this post
My loyal readers, both of you, will recall I make a big deal about the annual budget process because this is where the city government makes some of its most important decisions. How we as public policymakers spend money says a lot about priorities and strategies to provide the essential services we all expect and need. The decision of what we spend money on is crucial to whatever the city can do to make Lakewood a better place to live and work.
It's no surprise this is a lean budget year, what with the economy in such bad shape. So one does not expect to hear about new programs; one expects to hear about how to preserve what we've got and maybe do things more efficiently and differently.
That said, one cannot leave vision behind. Example: The Lakewood Landmarks board got a preliminary briefing about the Lakewood Colonial Center last night. The good news is that the architectural firm found fewer problems than we expected with the building. But it's still going to be a pricey venture to preserve that building, whoever preserves it. You could argue that's not a problem for the city, but the preliminary discussions raise a challenge and call us to dream: Should the Colonial Center be at the core of a stronger downtown-like neighborhood, and if so, how? What role should the city play in the surroundings of that neighborhood?
In the context of having dreams like this, the 2010 budget process should be a challenge. I encourage people to come by for budget hearings, because you learn a lot of things that no one could fit in one newspaper story or blog post. With that in mind, here's the calendar for this year's budget:
Sept. 27 (Monday): Revenue Workshop. That's a nice way of saying the staff and city advisory groups will present ways we could raise taxes. I'd be stunned, with how almost everyone out there is suffering in this economy, if that happened. But to be thorough, it's a discussion we should at least have. I don't think the voters elected a council that wants to raise taxes, but I've been wrong. Well I was wrong once, think it was 2007. Will have to check my notes :)
Oct. 6 (Wednesday - note there are some special Wednesday workshops) The council will discuss the budgets for planning, economic development, public works, parks and recreation, human services funding and facilities.
By the way, if you think that's too much for one night, you're right. I really wish we were like most cities and had council committees that explored these sorts of important city subjects in more detail. But 'course you've heard me say this before.
Oct. 11: This workshop will be about police and public safety, neighborhood policing and code enforcement, the courts and our legal department.
Oct. 13: This will be a joint session with the council and the chairmen and chairwomen - and any other members who attend - of the city's various citizen advisory committees such as for public safety, parks, roads, etc... For the 'average citizen,' whatever that might mean, this would be a good place to get an overview about the budget, as it will be presented to the advisory groups to get the discussion flowing.
Oct. 25: Another budget workshop.
Nov. 1: Public hearing about the budget.
Nov. 8: Another budget workshop.
And here it gets tricky in terms of calendaring. The 'new' council has been pretty agreeable, and it's possible the budget will get approved on Nov. 15. Or if we run into snags or outright disagreement, that could happen another night. There is a legal requirement the budget for 2011 be approved in 2010.
As with all of these, it's prudent to keep your eye on the city website or other usual sources for when meetings take place and where.
Hope to see you there - and if you can't make it, you'll hopefully hear more about the budget process as it moves along.
Comments:
<< Home
As past Councilmember and Deputy Mayor of Lakewood WA, I can speak with some authority on this subject.
You can find all about how much each job description in city governments is paid by contacting the Association of Washington Cities (AWC). They compile this information which is then used by the cities themselves to set their employee salaries. Typically for west side cities there are 17 municipalities of similar size that are lumped together to determine pay scales. However, merely using population size to determine comparable cities is at the heart of this fallacy when it comes to public employee salaries. So you have the likes of Bellevue in the same group as Longview: among the wealthiest and poorest cities that just happen to be about the same size.
The strategy of “poorer” cities is to compare their employee salaries with those listed in AWC and push to have them raised towards the “average” for all the cities. The immediate impact is to raise the average salary across the board even if those cities above the average do nothing! This is a vicious cycle and results in cities chasing the average ever upwards without regard to the most important, yet ignored determinant of salaries. No not population, but rather the economic health of that population: household income (HHI) in that city. There could be other such economic measures (per capita income, etc.) but this will serve as an example.
Bellevue is #1 in HHI ($62,338) while Lakewood #13 ($36,422): quite a difference. The average HHI for all 17 cities is $ Yet take a look at what they pay an Administrative Assistant (AA): Bellevue $60,372 and Lakewood $50,976. The average across all 17 west side cities is $52,512. So Lakewood now can claim its AA’s are underpaid compared to the average salary across all west side cities and this, though true, is irrelevant. For whereas a Bellevue AA is paid 97% of their HHI, the Lakewood AA is paid 140% of its HHI! Indeed the average across all 17 cities for AA salary is only117% of the average HHI. Clearly Lakewood AA’s, and a host of other employee positions are far above average for the community they are supposed to be serving. If in fact Lakewood was paying the average AA salary with respect to Lakewood’s HHI it would be $42,413……$8563 less than currently.
The other fallacious argument for these high salaries is that Lakewood would lose out to cities that pay higher than they do. The question that begs asking is if these other cities have such an advantage salary wise why would they ever have any vacancies to draw away Lakewood talent? Additionally there is also the matter of the cost of living of these cities which gobbles up any apparent salary increase. An AA living and working in Bellevue for $60000+ has less spending power than an AA living and working in Lakewood making $50000! One might argue that an AA living in Lakewood could go to work in Bellevue for the higher salary but that does not take into account a 3 hour daily commute and other expenses associated with working in Bellevue.
To be continued.....
You can find all about how much each job description in city governments is paid by contacting the Association of Washington Cities (AWC). They compile this information which is then used by the cities themselves to set their employee salaries. Typically for west side cities there are 17 municipalities of similar size that are lumped together to determine pay scales. However, merely using population size to determine comparable cities is at the heart of this fallacy when it comes to public employee salaries. So you have the likes of Bellevue in the same group as Longview: among the wealthiest and poorest cities that just happen to be about the same size.
The strategy of “poorer” cities is to compare their employee salaries with those listed in AWC and push to have them raised towards the “average” for all the cities. The immediate impact is to raise the average salary across the board even if those cities above the average do nothing! This is a vicious cycle and results in cities chasing the average ever upwards without regard to the most important, yet ignored determinant of salaries. No not population, but rather the economic health of that population: household income (HHI) in that city. There could be other such economic measures (per capita income, etc.) but this will serve as an example.
Bellevue is #1 in HHI ($62,338) while Lakewood #13 ($36,422): quite a difference. The average HHI for all 17 cities is $ Yet take a look at what they pay an Administrative Assistant (AA): Bellevue $60,372 and Lakewood $50,976. The average across all 17 west side cities is $52,512. So Lakewood now can claim its AA’s are underpaid compared to the average salary across all west side cities and this, though true, is irrelevant. For whereas a Bellevue AA is paid 97% of their HHI, the Lakewood AA is paid 140% of its HHI! Indeed the average across all 17 cities for AA salary is only117% of the average HHI. Clearly Lakewood AA’s, and a host of other employee positions are far above average for the community they are supposed to be serving. If in fact Lakewood was paying the average AA salary with respect to Lakewood’s HHI it would be $42,413……$8563 less than currently.
The other fallacious argument for these high salaries is that Lakewood would lose out to cities that pay higher than they do. The question that begs asking is if these other cities have such an advantage salary wise why would they ever have any vacancies to draw away Lakewood talent? Additionally there is also the matter of the cost of living of these cities which gobbles up any apparent salary increase. An AA living and working in Bellevue for $60000+ has less spending power than an AA living and working in Lakewood making $50000! One might argue that an AA living in Lakewood could go to work in Bellevue for the higher salary but that does not take into account a 3 hour daily commute and other expenses associated with working in Bellevue.
To be continued.....
Continued.....
All these positions also have a table of “step raises” which periodically increase a position’s salary simply because the employee has been in that position for a certain amount of time. The amount of each step raise and number of steps before the employee max’s out varies from position to position. However, when based upon already inflated salaries, the damage is further compounded by step raises.
There is also the “annual raise” that cities give their employees across the board. In 2007 an annual raise of 3.5% was given to all non-union (police guild) workers in the City of Lakewood: about 100 employees. On top of that there is something euphemistically referred to as “merit pay” which can range theoretically between 0-5% salary increase in Lakewood. You’d expect that only the best-of-the-best would receive merit pay but you’d be wrong. Who got merit pay? In 2006, 98 of about 100 employees got merit pay! How much? In 2006, those 98 employees got an average of 3.68% in merit pay. 50 of them got 4% or more in merit pay!
So add it up: 23% above average in base salaries as compared to HHI: step increases on top of that; 3.5% annual salary raises; nearly 4% “merit pay” increases. Is it any wonder that Lakewood faces a salary spike that threatens to double every 8-10 years while Lakewood’s population has remained stable for the last decade? So it then comes down to the City pleading poverty, threatening to cut essential services (police always seems to come of first with the rest of staff hidden from view) or increase taxes to support this profligate system.
That’s how it works with a view from the inside looking out. I am now on the outside looking in and it doesn’t look any better although I personally know better. The questions the population is asking about government employee salaries must be answered truthfully without any of the smoke and mirrors that agencies and government use to justify their existence and cost. I recently took on Pierce Transit and simply divided the total budget numbers by the number of employees (all their budget numbers) and came up with an average salary and benefit of about $80,000! I was taken to task by their apologists because “not everyone makes near the average.” OK. Well if most “worker bees” are below that average and make up the majority of employees, how much must the far fewer “queen bees” be making to bring that average up to $80,000!
I still haven’t heard an answer.
Until city (state and federal) governments tie their salaries to the communities they are supposed to serve, we will have an institutionalized system that serves only government employees.
Post a Comment
All these positions also have a table of “step raises” which periodically increase a position’s salary simply because the employee has been in that position for a certain amount of time. The amount of each step raise and number of steps before the employee max’s out varies from position to position. However, when based upon already inflated salaries, the damage is further compounded by step raises.
There is also the “annual raise” that cities give their employees across the board. In 2007 an annual raise of 3.5% was given to all non-union (police guild) workers in the City of Lakewood: about 100 employees. On top of that there is something euphemistically referred to as “merit pay” which can range theoretically between 0-5% salary increase in Lakewood. You’d expect that only the best-of-the-best would receive merit pay but you’d be wrong. Who got merit pay? In 2006, 98 of about 100 employees got merit pay! How much? In 2006, those 98 employees got an average of 3.68% in merit pay. 50 of them got 4% or more in merit pay!
So add it up: 23% above average in base salaries as compared to HHI: step increases on top of that; 3.5% annual salary raises; nearly 4% “merit pay” increases. Is it any wonder that Lakewood faces a salary spike that threatens to double every 8-10 years while Lakewood’s population has remained stable for the last decade? So it then comes down to the City pleading poverty, threatening to cut essential services (police always seems to come of first with the rest of staff hidden from view) or increase taxes to support this profligate system.
That’s how it works with a view from the inside looking out. I am now on the outside looking in and it doesn’t look any better although I personally know better. The questions the population is asking about government employee salaries must be answered truthfully without any of the smoke and mirrors that agencies and government use to justify their existence and cost. I recently took on Pierce Transit and simply divided the total budget numbers by the number of employees (all their budget numbers) and came up with an average salary and benefit of about $80,000! I was taken to task by their apologists because “not everyone makes near the average.” OK. Well if most “worker bees” are below that average and make up the majority of employees, how much must the far fewer “queen bees” be making to bring that average up to $80,000!
I still haven’t heard an answer.
Until city (state and federal) governments tie their salaries to the communities they are supposed to serve, we will have an institutionalized system that serves only government employees.
<< Home
