At the November 24 meeting of Lancaster City Council, Mayor Rick Gray presented details from the proposed 2010 budget, which itself will be publicly posted on the City’s website the following morning. Gray assumed a somber demeanor as he explained and defended a proposed property tax hike from 9.64 to 12.04 mils. “The millage rate for City properties will increase by 25 percent,” Gray explained, “This represents an overall tax increase of 6.6 percent when combined with School District and County property taxes.”
The proposed budget, Gray reported, would cut 43 paid positions in City Government, which amounts to a 10% workforce reduction. Salaries for all non-union employees will not be increased, which, with the rising cost of health coverage, will mean a NET pay reduction for many employees, Gray said. The Mayor also noted that his own salary will not increase for the duration of his four year term.
With revenues down to 2007 levels, Gray attributed the City’s bleak financial picture to a number of factors, most of which derive from the slumping economy:
- “Successful property tax assessment appeals left us with a zero gain in property tax revenues for this year—in spite of a 5 percent tax increase in 2009”
- “Interest income has fallen from $950,000 in 2006 to just over $100,000 this year”
- “The annual medical insurance premium for family coverage has increased from $15 thousand in 2006 to over $20 thousand in 2010—a 25 percent increase in 4 years.”
Gray dedicated a considerable portion of his report to addressing the various parties that could potentially be blamed for these rising costs—the City for its capital expenditures and allegedly “bloated bureaucracies,” the allegedly “greedy unions” for their persistent pay raise requirements, etc. Gray concluded, however, that the only party to blame would be the Pennsylvania General Assembly for not granting any of the new funding requests brought this year by the State’s municipalities:
“I ask that public employee unions, business owners, civic leaders, and all taxpayers join us in demanding that serious reforms be made in the structure and funding of local government in Pennsylvania. Unlike our own General Assembly, we do not have the luxury of ignoring these realities, or of deferring action on the problems that we face.”
Morales clarifies on City funds for Coalition
Late Tuesday afternoon, prior to the meeting of City Council, NewsLanc spoke with Councilman Joe Morales, also the Executive Director of the Community Safety Coalition, which owns and operates the city’s extensive network of 165 surveillance cameras. Morales, who receives a salary of $80,000 through the Coalition, said that he has never knowingly voted for any measure on City Council to grant funding to this organization since donning his current role as Executive Director last December.
“I don’t remember that there was a vote at Council,” Morales later asserted, “Certainly, if there would have been, I would have had to abstain.”
Mayor Gray told NewsLanc that the funds allocated to the Community Safety Coalition—$100,000 in 2008 and $200,000 in 2009—were included as part of the City’s Capital Budget. Gray stressed that these funds were specifically granted for the purchasing of cameras; none of these funds, according to Gray, could have been directed toward operational or personnel costs.
Should we pass the hat for Mr. Morales, whose salary declined $5,000 from $85,000 to $80,000 between 2:58 PM and 10:45 PM on the 24th?
That’s less than 8 hours. If it continues to drop at that same rate, he’ll be paying $475,000/year to the Community Safety Coalition before the end of the year.
Editor’s response: One is from a letter and the other from a news article. The $80,000 figure was what Morales had confirmed.