Police, fire departments break down figures for 2010-2011 fiscal year

Nobody associated with Culver City government is looking forward to trimming millions of dollars from the annual fiscal budget.

However, if the immediate reaction to interim city manager P. Lamont Ewell’s proposed numbers for the 2010-2011 fiscal year is any indication, there seems to be a spirit of cooperation and a sense of responsibility for what lies ahead in the next two years.

Having already delivered the proposed budget to the five-man city council May 17, Ewell took the next step in the process during the body’s most recent meeting Monday, May 24, offering up a 45-minute presentation detailing his two-year plan for the city to reconcile an estimated $7.6 million budget gap.

“Let me just state from the outset: This is not a great news budget,” said Ewell in his opening remarks. “But let me also state this is a budget of necessity. … It’s a budget that, if implemented, over the next two years will bring our expenses in line with our adjusted revenues.”

In other words, a budget that will force the city to live within its means — a mantra that’s recently gained plenty of traction throughout City Hall during the ongoing fiscal crisis that’s gripped not only Culver City, but the state of California, the nation and beyond.

Ewell tapped into that global phenomenon at the start, offering a macro economic outlook that eventually narrowed down into a micro viewpoint of where Culver City now sits as it prepares for the new fiscal year starting July 1. Included in that local analysis were breakdowns of dwindling holiday-period sales tax revenue that was down 6.5% in 2009 from the same time a year ago, a local unemployment rate of 8.7% that is the highest of the past decade, and a foreclosure rate of 3.38% that, while lower than the statewide average, is still higher than the national mark.

“In order to weather through this unprecedented set of times that we’re all experiencing, the only way to address it is to reduce the expenditure base,” Ewell said.

Unfortunately, the quickest way to do so is by eliminating jobs. The proposed budget calls for downsizing by 60 positions — 44 of which are currently vacant or will become so via an early retirement incentive offered by the city in recent months. That leaves 16 more positions that must be cut, with the city prepared to offer another round of “golden handshake” retirement incentives to help soften the blow for less-experienced employees.

Ewell’s proposal also calls for a reduction of the city’s general fund reserve policy from 30% to 20% to fall in line with some nearby municipalities, with the bulk of those suddenly available funds to be used for a one-time expenditure to shore up aging infrastructure and technology — areas Ewell stressed that, if not resolved now, could actually become more costly by being addressed with a piecemeal approach in the future.

Upon the completion of his proposal, members of the council lauded Ewell’s work — especially given the trying circumstances in which he was forced to operate after coming aboard the city payroll following the sudden resignation of former city manager Mark Scott in March — while also offering their opinions on areas of the proposed budget with which they aren’t comfortable.

“I don’t see any particular reason why we should modify the 30%,” said Councilman Scott Malsin, pointing to the general fund reserve proposal, a sentiment agreed upon by the majority of his colleagues. “Essentially, spending anything down from that is not living within our means.”

Councilman Jeff Cooper questioned whether, instead of permanent job cuts, the city might examine temporary salary reductions across the board for city employees.

“Everything has to be a permanent fix,” said Ewell in response. “We can’t be a part of short-term fixes.”

Following the back-and-forth dialogue between the council and interim city manager, Culver City Police Department Chief Don Pedersen and Culver City Fire Department Acting Chief Chris Sellers each broke down their particular department budgets.

Pedersen’s presentation was succinct, outlining the 10 positions on the chopping block and how the department will compensate for their absence. Eight of the positions are currently vacant, and two employees are opting for the early retirement incentive. None come in patrol operations.

“We feel that we will continue to provide a very high quality of service to the people that live, work in and visit the city of Culver City,” Pedersen said. “The effects of these proposed cuts will be carefully evaluated and may require some further reorganization within the department. But no matter what happens, the focus of the department will continue to be on patrol operations.”

Sellers detailed how the loss of three positions should not negatively impact the council’s stated goals of continued top-level accreditation for the fire department, as well as the ability to bring in money through permits and via other avenues.

“The positions that we talked about tonight have no impact on the revenues for the fire department,” Sellers said.

For an in-depth look at the full budget proposal, log on at www.culvercity.org/government/finance and click on the “Budget Books” link on menu on the left side of the page.