At the June 28, 2011 Board of Supervisors Meeting Supervisor Spellman once again questioned the aquisition of another snow plow when people are being laid off.
"With regards to public works, roads and services….I understand the necessity for maintenaince schedule in a sunset built in to replace vehicle when they reach a certain mileage, I am not opposed to replacement” however” at this point in time we are at a fiscal crisis…we need to hit the pause button …until it makes more sense financially.”
"My favorite" part of the proposed budget "135,000 dump truck / snow plow...we purchased three of those vehicles last year and I was opposed as a resident, sitting in the audience. I don’t believe for a minute that anybody thought I would let that slide without making a comment about it." The total questioned budget amount is $489, 139, budgeted for replacement cost for vehicle 139,000 for another new snowplow. Three 'snow plow' vehicles purchased last year and “I was opposed to that then I am opposed to it now."
A portion of the funding for this budget item comes from property taxes which Spellman felt could be used at the discretion of the board. Spellman stated that this expense doesn’t make sense, “I cannot look my constituents in the eye and say I used property tax money for dump trucks and snow plows instead of personnel that are slated to be laid off...There may be people that disagree with me, but I wish to save peoples jobs so they can put food on the table instead of buy new trucks."
The same question was raised for the Integrated Waste Management funding, 175,000 allocated for new trucks. SPellman questioned if a portion of those monies can also be used for staffing personnel. Last week the Board voted to lay off three equipment operators at transfer stations “There is no way on God’s green earth that I’m going to vote for 170,000 for new trucks when I know there are three people out there that we just laid off.” Spellman had voted to lay those people off stating that he felt there was no other option, but now pointed to the 170,000 set aside for acquisition of new vehicle, “You better call those three people and tell them to shred those pink slips. Because food on the table is more important right now.” Spellman believes that maintenance of vehicles can get them through this tough fiscal time. “Until we have such time to release the pause button.” He requested that the board see the wisdom of his words.
Wilensky questioned how the funds received were broken down, what portion of each area can potentially be spent on personnel, what percent has to be spent on capital. Questioned also the cost of payments on a new vehicle vs cost of maintaining existing one.
Tom Garcia, replied that the cost of maintaining the existing truck for Integrated Waste would cost more than acquisition of a new vehicle. As for road maintenance they are transitioning to larger dual use dump trucks and putting snow plows on the front in the winter. Rebecca Callen, auditor controller, stated that there is no portion of the money that can be titled “discretionary” for Board use, yet within each department the monies can be utilized to maintain jobs as opposed to acquisition of vehicles if so desired. Garcia, stated it could be used for staffing but that if he were not to purchase equipment he would not use it on personnel, he would put the funds toward continuing operations to 2018 so that the landfill does not close.
Spellman reiterated that his goal is to protect people within his district, to try to save jobs if at all possible.
Multiple persons approached the Board and expressed their support or their opposition to Spellman’s “job saving” technique. Spellman took that opportunity to say “You may have missed the point…if it is that we do not have money to keep these employees employed or it is redundant, yes, it would be appropriate for those people to be laid off … however, if we have a bucket of money that can be used for employees and we are going to use it to buy new vehicles… then if we don’t have the money, don’t buy the new trucks, but if you are going to spend in deficit money we do not have it is better to spend in deficit for employees so they can pay their mortgages, put food on the table and shoes on their kids feet instead of buy new trucks. So if you are going to be irresponsible be irresponsible by keeping people so they can pay their mortgage.”
Callaway supported the item, stating that “Garcia does not scotch tape” his department. She felt it was not cost saving to continue maintenance. At a previous meeting Spellman pointed out that Callaway’s district is the recipient of the new road equipment and the 3 pieces of purchased equipment last year.
No comments:
Post a Comment