Tax Time
Contributed by: got it
It is tax time in the City of Oshkosh. Where can we cut the fat? Are there things offered in the city that should be cut, or eliminated? How do you feel about the garbage pickup being done through user fees? What depts can survive cuts to decrease our tax bills? Where should the council make concessions when it comes time to cut department budgets?
Some topics that could be included: reduce snow plowing, turn off more street lights, reduce library hours, cut fire dept or police dept staffing, reduce street reconstruction, collect garbage less frequently, etc. Brainstorm! Throw ideas out there! It should be interesting to see where citizens think we can save money!
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 07:53 AM MST
How about starting with health insurance? A city employees share of health insurance is 5%. The county will be up to 15% in the current contract. How about sick time payouts? Eliminate them. How about step increases? Eliminate them. Does this sound like the county? Funny how the Northwestern pounds on county employees but says nothing about the city employees compensation package.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 08:20 AM MST
What are the sick time payouts for the city?
Also, when you say step increases, what do you mean? The thing I think of is a starting wage, with incremental increases to a maximum pay over a certain period of time. Is that what you mean?
So for instance, if the starting wage is 25,000 and the maximum wage is 40,000, the employee gets increases every year for 5 years till they get to 40,000. Is that what you mean? How do you eliminate it? What would you do with starting and maximum wages then?
Good start!
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:57 AM MST
I do not have the exact sick time payout numbers off the top of my head. I can get them for you though. I do know it is more than we can afford. I believe the step program is how you explained it. I believe the county eliminated step increases for administrative employees next year. That also sends a message to the unions that they are next. The same goes for health insurance. We need to raise the employees contributions to at least 15% next contract. Start with the administrative people now. Send a message to the unions, you are next. 5% is an unrealistic #, and we can not afford it.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 10:34 AM MST
One thing that you must take into account, tho, is that the current state law has a provision called "quid pro quo." What this means is, if you take something from the union (sick leave payout) or make them pay more towards something (health insurance) then you have to give something equal back to them-- more vacation days, etc. Not saying I agree with it, but it's the current state law, and the city will have to deal with it.
I am not sure I agree with the stopping the sick leave payout. Any governmental agency that bargained this into a contract did so to SAVE money. It falls back to the quid pro quo. If the city would forego a larger pay increase, they did increase the sick leave payout to the employee. How does this save money? The city pays only the day's wage, and doesn't have to pay social security, contribution to pension, etc. I think that would be backtracking, and would set a poor precedent.
I believe I read all of the city's contracts are tied up until 2007. With that said, then, how does the city cut costs for the coming year? Wages and insurance contributions are not touchable for the time being.
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 12:04 PM MST
You need to start with cuts for administrative employees. Once you have set a precedent you must follow through with the union employees in 2007. When they fight it you must be willing to take it to arbitration. I understand the rules the state has in place. If we try and fail we can then go to the state and say we have tried to cut our costs but you have tied our hands. Right now we just keep handing out the increases and saying there is nothing we can do about it. Have we tried?
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 10:36 AM MST
One other Q, DDR....
How do you eliminate the step increases, just leave the employee at 25,000 with no increase? Is that what you mean? How do they get raises, then?
Thanks for the ideas!
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 11:52 AM MST
One year freeze.
Tax Time
Authored by: DP on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 03:39 PM MST
How about this novel idea...pay someone what they're worth. Steps and scales sound too much like Socialism to me.
P.S. Re: Quid pro quo...since when do state statutes mean anything (i.e. Competitive Bidding, Use of County Sales tax money, illegal gambling, etc.)? Funny how in most circumstances, quid pro quo is generally unethical or actually illegal. How about this...you accept the cuts and we give you all jobs for another year!
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 04:41 PM MST
Yeah, I hear you, but what are we going to enforce and what aren't we? I think we would have our hands full if we decided we weren't going to play by the med/arb and quid pro quo laws. Too many liberals that would not allow that to happen.
And the city services we are provided are, for the most part, very well administered. You have to be careful not to cross the line of decreasing salary/benefits to the point that the only people taking city jobs are derelicts.
Tax Time
Authored by: L Schaffer on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 07:31 PM MST
How about this, take the fire dept. off the tax roll, from what I am told, the fire dept. makes over $3 million dollars for the city and that money goes into the coffers for the city to spend whatever. The new ambulances were paid by capital improvements funds. The fire dept. knows how to take the people to the cleaners by what they charge the peple who use the ambulance. Maybe by taking them off the tax roll, the fire dept. will find out they did not have to hire 6 new people.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 08:53 PM MST
OK...this is turning into more of a personnel issue than a services issue. If we are going to cut personnel, where? L Schaeffer, your vote is for the FD. Where else? Police dept? Library? Public works?
We obviously can't take depts off the tax roll. What else should we do?
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:32 PM MST
OK...I have been thinking. Here are my ideas:
Reduce plantings around the city. The boats with flowers, flower gardens etc can be reduced.
Garbage pickup every other week instead of every week.
No more recycling pickups. You must take your recyclables to the center on Y yourself. As a result, garbage must be in clear bags so recyclable materials are not thrown out. Garbage will not be picked up if you have recyclables in your garbage.
Re-pave less traveled streets with concrete curb and gutter and asphalt instead of making everything be concrete.
Close one fire station. The north side fire station protects mostly incarcerated people, anyways.
Police and fire depts charge when they respond to burglar or fire alarms that are false.
Ensure the lawn waste drop off site is self sufficient. Fees must cover the operation of the site.
Reduce snow plowing of secondary and tertiary streets to business hours only. Use overtime to plow primary arterials only.
Reduce library hours. Eliminate the Bookmobile.
Make the new water park self sufficient. (See yard waste drop off site above)
Increase costs of building permits, etc, and citations written by the police dept.
Require all employees to use the most cost effective means of health care-- no choice.
Add a one dollar surcharge to tickets at the Leach. 50 cents goes to continued upkeep of the theater, 50 cents goes to debt retirement.
Turn off some street lights on arterials between midnight and 6am (Main St, Jackson St, Murdock Av, Witzel Av--streets that are busier even late at night)
Tax Time
Authored by: L Schaffer on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:37 PM MST
What do you mean we can't take depts. off the tax roll, our city manager is talking about removing garbage collection from the tax roll and putting in it's place a fee. Don't tell me it can't be done. You are the one that asked for suggestions, if we can't take dept. off what is left. If you are talking about health insurance, don't bother, Aurora has that tied up with a contract with the city.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:41 PM MST
I see what you're saying. I didn't get what you meant when you said take them off the tax rolls. I wonder if the ambulance revenue would be enough for the entire FD budget tho. Are you talking about just putting the money earned by the ambulance right back into the FD? Is that what you mean?
Aurora does not have every employee in their insurance. Some employees choose TouchPoint. If they would all have to go to Aurora, there would be additional savings.
What do you think of my other ideas? Which do you like? Which don't you like?
Tax Time
Authored by: L Schaffer on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:53 PM MST
The money would stay with the fire dept. They would pay all the salaries and benefits and buy what equipment that is needed. Some of your suggestions are good.
It is tax time in the City of Oshkosh. Where can we cut the fat? Are there things offered in the city that should be cut, or eliminated? How do you feel about the garbage pickup being done through user fees? What depts can survive cuts to decrease our tax bills? Where should the council make concessions when it comes time to cut department budgets?
Some topics that could be included: reduce snow plowing, turn off more street lights, reduce library hours, cut fire dept or police dept staffing, reduce street reconstruction, collect garbage less frequently, etc. Brainstorm! Throw ideas out there! It should be interesting to see where citizens think we can save money!
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 07:53 AM MST
How about starting with health insurance? A city employees share of health insurance is 5%. The county will be up to 15% in the current contract. How about sick time payouts? Eliminate them. How about step increases? Eliminate them. Does this sound like the county? Funny how the Northwestern pounds on county employees but says nothing about the city employees compensation package.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 08:20 AM MST
What are the sick time payouts for the city?
Also, when you say step increases, what do you mean? The thing I think of is a starting wage, with incremental increases to a maximum pay over a certain period of time. Is that what you mean?
So for instance, if the starting wage is 25,000 and the maximum wage is 40,000, the employee gets increases every year for 5 years till they get to 40,000. Is that what you mean? How do you eliminate it? What would you do with starting and maximum wages then?
Good start!
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:57 AM MST
I do not have the exact sick time payout numbers off the top of my head. I can get them for you though. I do know it is more than we can afford. I believe the step program is how you explained it. I believe the county eliminated step increases for administrative employees next year. That also sends a message to the unions that they are next. The same goes for health insurance. We need to raise the employees contributions to at least 15% next contract. Start with the administrative people now. Send a message to the unions, you are next. 5% is an unrealistic #, and we can not afford it.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 10:34 AM MST
One thing that you must take into account, tho, is that the current state law has a provision called "quid pro quo." What this means is, if you take something from the union (sick leave payout) or make them pay more towards something (health insurance) then you have to give something equal back to them-- more vacation days, etc. Not saying I agree with it, but it's the current state law, and the city will have to deal with it.
I am not sure I agree with the stopping the sick leave payout. Any governmental agency that bargained this into a contract did so to SAVE money. It falls back to the quid pro quo. If the city would forego a larger pay increase, they did increase the sick leave payout to the employee. How does this save money? The city pays only the day's wage, and doesn't have to pay social security, contribution to pension, etc. I think that would be backtracking, and would set a poor precedent.
I believe I read all of the city's contracts are tied up until 2007. With that said, then, how does the city cut costs for the coming year? Wages and insurance contributions are not touchable for the time being.
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 12:04 PM MST
You need to start with cuts for administrative employees. Once you have set a precedent you must follow through with the union employees in 2007. When they fight it you must be willing to take it to arbitration. I understand the rules the state has in place. If we try and fail we can then go to the state and say we have tried to cut our costs but you have tied our hands. Right now we just keep handing out the increases and saying there is nothing we can do about it. Have we tried?
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 10:36 AM MST
One other Q, DDR....
How do you eliminate the step increases, just leave the employee at 25,000 with no increase? Is that what you mean? How do they get raises, then?
Thanks for the ideas!
Tax Time
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 11:52 AM MST
One year freeze.
Tax Time
Authored by: DP on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 03:39 PM MST
How about this novel idea...pay someone what they're worth. Steps and scales sound too much like Socialism to me.
P.S. Re: Quid pro quo...since when do state statutes mean anything (i.e. Competitive Bidding, Use of County Sales tax money, illegal gambling, etc.)? Funny how in most circumstances, quid pro quo is generally unethical or actually illegal. How about this...you accept the cuts and we give you all jobs for another year!
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 04:41 PM MST
Yeah, I hear you, but what are we going to enforce and what aren't we? I think we would have our hands full if we decided we weren't going to play by the med/arb and quid pro quo laws. Too many liberals that would not allow that to happen.
And the city services we are provided are, for the most part, very well administered. You have to be careful not to cross the line of decreasing salary/benefits to the point that the only people taking city jobs are derelicts.
Tax Time
Authored by: L Schaffer on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 07:31 PM MST
How about this, take the fire dept. off the tax roll, from what I am told, the fire dept. makes over $3 million dollars for the city and that money goes into the coffers for the city to spend whatever. The new ambulances were paid by capital improvements funds. The fire dept. knows how to take the people to the cleaners by what they charge the peple who use the ambulance. Maybe by taking them off the tax roll, the fire dept. will find out they did not have to hire 6 new people.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 08:53 PM MST
OK...this is turning into more of a personnel issue than a services issue. If we are going to cut personnel, where? L Schaeffer, your vote is for the FD. Where else? Police dept? Library? Public works?
We obviously can't take depts off the tax roll. What else should we do?
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:32 PM MST
OK...I have been thinking. Here are my ideas:
Reduce plantings around the city. The boats with flowers, flower gardens etc can be reduced.
Garbage pickup every other week instead of every week.
No more recycling pickups. You must take your recyclables to the center on Y yourself. As a result, garbage must be in clear bags so recyclable materials are not thrown out. Garbage will not be picked up if you have recyclables in your garbage.
Re-pave less traveled streets with concrete curb and gutter and asphalt instead of making everything be concrete.
Close one fire station. The north side fire station protects mostly incarcerated people, anyways.
Police and fire depts charge when they respond to burglar or fire alarms that are false.
Ensure the lawn waste drop off site is self sufficient. Fees must cover the operation of the site.
Reduce snow plowing of secondary and tertiary streets to business hours only. Use overtime to plow primary arterials only.
Reduce library hours. Eliminate the Bookmobile.
Make the new water park self sufficient. (See yard waste drop off site above)
Increase costs of building permits, etc, and citations written by the police dept.
Require all employees to use the most cost effective means of health care-- no choice.
Add a one dollar surcharge to tickets at the Leach. 50 cents goes to continued upkeep of the theater, 50 cents goes to debt retirement.
Turn off some street lights on arterials between midnight and 6am (Main St, Jackson St, Murdock Av, Witzel Av--streets that are busier even late at night)
Tax Time
Authored by: L Schaffer on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:37 PM MST
What do you mean we can't take depts. off the tax roll, our city manager is talking about removing garbage collection from the tax roll and putting in it's place a fee. Don't tell me it can't be done. You are the one that asked for suggestions, if we can't take dept. off what is left. If you are talking about health insurance, don't bother, Aurora has that tied up with a contract with the city.
Tax Time
Authored by: got it on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:41 PM MST
I see what you're saying. I didn't get what you meant when you said take them off the tax rolls. I wonder if the ambulance revenue would be enough for the entire FD budget tho. Are you talking about just putting the money earned by the ambulance right back into the FD? Is that what you mean?
Aurora does not have every employee in their insurance. Some employees choose TouchPoint. If they would all have to go to Aurora, there would be additional savings.
What do you think of my other ideas? Which do you like? Which don't you like?
Tax Time
Authored by: L Schaffer on Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 09:53 PM MST
The money would stay with the fire dept. They would pay all the salaries and benefits and buy what equipment that is needed. Some of your suggestions are good.
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 12:28 PM
<< Home