- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Politics
- School Zone
- Back to School
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Calendar
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Santa Barbara Council Approves Budget, But Deficit Already Looms
After Santa Barbara staff tackled the Herculean task of balancing the city’s 2010 budget, the City Council passed the budget unanimously Tuesday — with a caveat.
“Here we are today before you for adoption of the fiscal year 2010 budget ... it’s a budget that, in staff’s opinion, already has a $1.4 million hole in it,” Bob Peirson, the city’s finance director, told councilmembers as he walked them through what had transpired.
Recent developments have surfaced since June that make the budget’s future uncertain. City sales tax numbers for the first quarter came in recently and were down 17.6 percent, which represents an unprecedented decline, according to Peirson. “In my 20-plus years here, I’ve never seen a quarter like that,” he said.
When city officials factor in that decline, they will be forced to revise their sale tax estimates for the coming fiscal year, most likely lower by $1.1 million. That number is determined by the latest projections sent from the California Department of Finance.
May’s transient occupancy tax was down 15.7 percent, putting next year’s projections at $300,000 less than expected.
Nine budget review sessions and public review hearings have been held since the budget was released April 21. The council then went through and made additional adjustments to the budget at its June 9 meeting.
No city department went unscathed, and a combination of cost savings, revenue increases, and ongoing and one-time measures, such as reducing money to set aside for a vehicle replacement fund, were all part of the city’s approach to balance the budget.
Adding to the uncertainty, the city’s gas tax and property taxes are not off the table either, and could be subject to seizure from Sacramento.
Much of Tuesday’s discussion centered on several positions in the police department that remain unfilled. Four police officer positions are waiting to be funded by stimulus money, and the city will not know until September if those grants will be filled. A grant application also is pending for a fire education outreach coordinator.
Two nonsworn positions also remain unfilled, for a rangemaster and a network technician, which will equal $152,000 in savings. Peirson said the staff is not recommending the restoration of those positions at this point because they may have to return in the coming weeks for more budget changes.
He also said the Police Officers Association had submitted an offer of labor concessions totaling $260,000, the bulk of which would come from vacation, compensatory and holiday cash-outs. The association also offered to extend the offer to next June. It was set to expire in December.
Councilmember Roger Horton said the positions shouldn’t be filled right now. “Tonight is not the time to start putting things back in the budget when we don’t even know what the deficit is,” he said. “Maybe in six weeks we can talk about restoring something.”
Although she was hesitant to make cuts to public safety, Councilmember Iya Falcone said she would support the budget as long as the whole group was willing to come back for discussions.
Councilmember Grant House suggested the members approve the budget but that they revisit it in the coming months. “All the departments have made their best recommendations as to what services to keep to the public as a whole, and I think we should honor that,” he said.
Expressing his concern over the loss of civilian support staff at the police department, Councilmember Dale Francisco said the current budget had structural problems. “As much as I would like to see those positions restored ... the things that we put back two weeks ago are already in jeopardy,” he said.
“We’re passing it, it’s formally balanced, but we already know it’s not going to work,” he said.
“I believe that we should make the adjustments for reality right now,” Councilmember Das Williams said, and budget for the shortfall. He said he wanted to make sure the grants for the sworn officers came through before the city chose to fill the information technician position was filled. Revenues would need to be increased as well, and Williams suggested a tax on marijuana dispensaries and ask the voters to approve a 10- to 15-cent charge on single-use bags.
“I think what we’re all saying is that as hard as this year was, we’re nowhere near over trying to figure out the full structural deficit of the city’s budget,” Councilmember Helene Schneider said. The city has become smaller and more efficient in the process, she said, and she advocated approving the budget and coming back to evaluate in the coming months after more information comes forward.
“I like the idea that the staff is going to look at the bigger picture and bring it back to us,” Mayor Marty Blum said. “It’s going to be interesting to see what the next three months of sales tax is. We need to be very prudent and cautious.”
— Noozhawk staff writer Lara Cooper can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 03:03 AM
Nobody on the council deserves to be re-elected IMO. The two Mayoral candidates and Williams were wranglers riding the bubble until they fell off of their horse. Who gets elected will have to be more responsible with OUR money. Less service while paying more for less is classic! Read the quotes, especially Mr.Peirson’s. Francisco’s got it close (except for his vote) use reality, please!
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 05:24 AM
LET’S FILL THAT $1.4 MILLION HOLE IN THE BUDGET BY ELECTING THE REALEST OUTSIDER. OUT WITH INCUMBENTS AND OTHERS WHO ARE MORE OF THE SAME.
THE REAL REPRESENTATIVE OF SANTA BARBARA’S HARDWORKING PRIVATE SECTOR.
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 05:24 AM
Thank you City Council for putting so much time and effort into this budget. I am thrilled to see that the city may start charging shoppers 10 to 15 cents per non-reusable bag, when they fail to bring their own reusable bags when they go shopping. This, of course, will be subject to voter approval. Let’s get this on the ballot for 2010 ASAP. This is a wonderfully Progressive way of helping the environment and raising much needed revenue for the city. I LOVE Santa Barbara!!!!!!
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 11:12 AM
I say make government useless unions illegal—They are already civil servants—Unions are not needed anymore, thats why we so many now have government agencies..
Kill the unions
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 01:21 PM
Kill the unions? How about kill the middle class? This absurd idea that everyone in the US is overpaid because illegal immigrants and overseas labor can do it for less is crazed. The last bastion of the middle class is protected only by those who can and have banded together to assure that their labor provides a decent standard of living. More unions are needed.
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 01:28 PM
Great - outlaw shopping bags while the city goes bankrupt. That is called sitting on a whale fishing for minnows, i.e. the Council can deal only with trivia and cannot solve big problems. The newest budget is not a solution, merely a delay - just like the State legislature. I’m with the previous poster - outlaw government employee unions.
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 01:38 PM
WomanforPeaceSanity, you want the city to tax shoppers based on their choice of shopping bag? And this is a good idea how? And just what does this do for the environment, other than prop up an entire industry that produces nothing but regulations? Your idea of progressive is just that, progress, in a negative direction. Why on earth would you support government taking any new revenue from an already over taxed and faltering economy? And how is it your “progressive” philosophy means applying the most regressive taxes on the least of our citizens? The city of Santa Barbara does not get it, like WomanforPeaceSanity. They are surprised at revenue declines in the private sector that are “unprecedented”. Wow, really? Where the hell have these guys been for the last 6 months? If they want to plug the hole in their budget, then they are going to have to scale government back to a level that is affordable by the local economy, period. Since their primary function is public infrastructure and safety, then those areas should get the whack last and all the other superfluous crap goes first, and there is plenty of that, starting with overblown salaries.
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 04:01 PM
I agree they have out lived any purpose.
» wrote on 06.24.09 @ 04:13 PM
The idea that “the last bastion of the middle class” is protected by unions might have been true in 1925. While unions have served a serious purpose in our economic history, like most things they have been overdone. Big union execs are no different from big business execs or big government “officials”. They all seek to maximize their power and income. While there are surely some sincere “worker power” folks in the union hierarchy, the unions in general have become just one more big group seeking to sustain and advance itself. Our state is bankrupt because of union power and government stupidity. Our country may be headed the same way if the unions are allowed to have membership elections without secret ballots. Power corrupts. Even union power.
» wrote on 06.25.09 @ 11:16 AM
Why do we the taxpayer not get proper services monday through friday. If they just lower the wages they will be open everyday. The unions are always trying to scam the taxpayers, and they will tried to get paid for the days they didn’t work—mark this..
Go union Go broke—Go union go broke..
» wrote on 06.26.09 @ 06:36 AM
Re protecting the middle class check out today’s SBNP story that the middle class has been falling for decades while the rich are getting richer. The more we take from working people and give to the top echelon the more we destroy the idea of an egalitarian society. The propaganda put out by business and bought into by libertarian and conservative think tanks is toxic. People have the inherent right to band together to protect the life of themselves and their families. Unions offer the only way for this to be done when corporation are free to spend billions on their lobbying effort and campaign donations.
» wrote on 06.26.09 @ 05:07 PM
Unions are a necessary balance against the power of big corporations. HOWEVER, government employee unions are functioning as a direct path to siphon taxpayer dollars off to government employees, esp in California. Because the pols use the unions to get votes (of course all perfectly legally and without any sort of pressure on the union rank and file, I’m sure) the unions then get special favors from the pols. Listen to Helene as a perfect example - she has committed that no city employee should lose his or her job should she be elected, i.e. she has publically stated that she is bought and paid for by the unions. San Francisco, never accused of being either conservative or libertarian, has the right idea; government employee benefits are approved or not by the voters - been that way for decades. Ventura County is considering the idea as well. So should SB. So should we all…
» wrote on 06.27.09 @ 04:13 AM
Our elected politicians need to be controlled. Orange County last year voted into law that no more union benefits can be given without the vote of the people. It passed by over 75%. SB should do the same.
More Local News »
Supervisors Face Grim Budget Picture, Rising Benefit Costs
The governor's proposed budget and other fiscal challenges — including county staffing, salaries and retirement — will top the agenda Tuesday
Hotel Developer Aims to Trim Extended Stay with Goleta Design Review
Planning board will size up latest version of previously pared Marriott Residence Inn project
‘Spirit of the Ocean’ Rock Party a Rain and Shine Event
Two boulders at La Patera Ranch will be carved into a replica of the famous courthouse fountain
Judge Upholds Life Sentence for Jesse James Hollywood
The defense's motion for a new trial is denied in the kidnap-murder of Nicholas Markowitz
Former News-Press Editor Jerry Roberts Wins Arbitration Award
Court documents show owner/publisher Wendy McCaw has been ordered to $1 million in legal fees and arbitration costs
Weather: Light Rain Fog/Mist 52.0º
Search Noozhawk »
Today's Calendar events - 02.09.10 »
