Minutes 04/26/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

April 26, 1983 save annually an amount equivalent to about 3¢ on the real estate tax rate. If members of Cit Council feel that this reduction is too severe, the other alternative is to increase the gar- bage collection fee from $4 to $5 a month. In addition, I am recommending the gradual elimi- nation of dumpster collection service by the City which will produce additional savings. This service is available from private businesses and it is not necessary to be continued as a public function. The dumpster service will be phased out over a period of time through attri- tion of personnel and equipment. I regret that these proposed service reductions are necessary and sincerely hope that our citizens will accept these changes. Given the economic realities cited earlier, however, soun, management dictates that municipal services be scaled down where possible in order to effect long-term cost reductions. PUBLIC UTILITIES In order to improve cash flow and reduce the level of accounts receivable in the Public Utility Fund, I am recommending the adoption of a bi-monthly billing schedule for public utili bills. In addition, this schedule may be more convenient for many of our citizens with their personal budgeting. ~ It is necessary for me to also recommend an increase in water fees in order for the publi utility operations to continue to be adequately funded. Residential water meter service charges are recommended to increase from $1.50 to $2.00 per month and the water consumption rate to increase from $1.08 to $1.13 per 1,000 gallons. Together, these increases will add approximately 8S¢ per month additional cost to the average residential customer. GENERAL FUND BALANCE AND GENERAL REVENUE SHARING As tempting as it may be, I cannot recommend the utilization of a greater portion of the available general fund balance in a effort to reduce the proposed tax increase. The proposed budget includes $2.3 million as a contingency for possible budget emergencies. This represen: about 2.6% of the total General Fund budget, and is essential for possible budget requirements For instance, one of the greates~ uncertainties relative to the proposed budget is whether General Revenue Sharing will be extended beyond September 30, 1982. Continuation of Revenue Sharing by Congress appears favorable, and the proposed budget has been prepared based on that premise. However, in the event that General Revenue Sharing is not continued, all of the emergency budget contingency will be needed. Therefore, I feel the general fund balance is th minimum acceptable amount and any further reduction is not in the best interest of the City no would it represent sound financial management. PROPOSED PAY INCREASES FOR MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES I am justifiably proud of the calibre of Portsmouth City employees and I would like to to retain this loyal work force and continue to attract others. Ironically, in these days of high unemployment the City is losing personnel to other public and private agencies. Already in this Fiscal Year, we have lost 262 persons. From the data available it appears that not only are we losing our tenured employees, but a large percentage are leaving after 1 to 2 years. This strongly indicates that we are training our employees for employment elsewhere. I requested the Director of Personnel to determine reasons for such loss of valuable employees. To my dismay, from a recent regional survey, Portsmouth employees are below avera in every category of a comparable position in the cities of Norfolk, Virginia Beech and Chesa- peake, For example, protective service employees average 17.7% less, paraprofessionals 21.6% less, and skilled trades were 14.7% less than the other communities. A comparison of the Consumer Price Index in the last 5 years against respective increases in salaries to employees is an additional graphic presentation that the purchasing power of our employees has signifi- cantly dwindled. In effect, a Portsmouth City employee that has been at the top of his pay scale for S years is actually purchasing 22% less today than he was 5 years ago! In addition, this failure to keep pace with the Consumer Price Index will eventually result in our inabilit to continue to attract and retain qualified employees. The following is a comparison between increases in the Consumer Price Index over the past 5 years and City employees salaries as of July 1 each year: Fiscal Year General Wage CPI* 1978-79 5.0% 7.6% 1979~80 5.0% 11.S% 1980-81 5.0% '13.5% 2.5% (Jan.) 1981-82 5.0% 10.2% 1982-83 2.5% 4.6% Total 25.0% 47.4% *Source: United States Department of Labor Consequently, I am recommending that all employees of this City receive a 7~% general wa ~Effective July 1 all step increases will be frozen for increase beginning July 1, 1983.j . , twelve months in order to accomp'l~sh this effort. Almost 50% of our employees are at the top of their pay~ scale and in the Fire Department 80% are at the top. This action, if granted, would recognize the long-term employee and attempt to help offset that 17 to 20% differential between Portsmouth and the surrounding communities as well as raise the starting salary of all positions. Because of budgetary and economic restraints, I cannot recommend an increase of Y