New Rangers in Mayor's FY16 budget... but what is the "Regeneration Program"?

Mayor Garcetti released his 2015-16 City Budget a couple weeks ago. Included in the Recreation and Parks response to the Mayor's proposed budget is this:

"Approved the Park Ranger Regeneration Program ($1,200,000) which will allow RAP to implement the re-establishment of the Metro District Rangers Program. This is the first phase in a multi-year plan. It is expected each year a new region will become active. The Regeneration Program is expected to improve "quality of park life" issues by establishing a ranger presence throughout the City."

The Regeneration Program?   Sounds like a plotline from the fantasy show, Doctor Who. The written proof of this plan is just as elusive.  There are no City Council motions or searchable documents on this plan.   Ranger supporters turned out and spoke out loudly for what was the last "plan," making their case for the Optimum investment in the Park Ranger program.  You can read about that here. The report was filed, and it's been crickets on the issue in the public process of City Hall since then.

Now, *magic* - another new, different plan.  And, apparently, Griffith Metro gets it all from what is implied here.  Meanwhile, 10 Rangers barely covers the attrition in the past few years, much less provides any new service.

Also worth noting is that there is no sign of a Chief Park Ranger in that budget.  I did not think a POST Agency could exist without a Chief due to things like chain-of-command, and all that related peace officer silliness.  Thinking it's time to ask California POST directly about this.

If you wonder why your local park looks like crap, read this:

Just some of the services we no longer receive in Los Angeles parks are listed below. These losses are a direct result of the City's "chargeback" policy against the Dept. of Recreation and Parks.

Note: Text in italics and choice of image is ours. Typos are probably ours.
-----

DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS (RAP)

LIST OF SERVICE REDUCTIONS & IMPACTS DUE TO BUDGET REDUCTIONS AND INCREASED PAYMENT OF INDIRECT COSTS

FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2008-09 TO 2013-14


(RAP has) Paid $151 million to City General Fund in support costs (refuse collection, utility, pension, health care and fleet costs). These funds were previously used to provide RAP services to City of Los Angeles residents.

• Elimination of all City Public Building Landscape Services (proposed for FY 2013-14).
• Elimination of Landscape Services provided to the Police Administration Building (proposed for FY 2013-14).
• Functional Transfer of recreational and maintenance services provided by RAP at seven (7) Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA) sites to non-profit or others (RAP proposed the functional transfer of three (3) sites for FY 2013-14).
• Reduction of Clean and Safe Spaces (CLASS) Parks, recreational programming and maintenance services at seven (7) HACLA sites.
• Reduction of CLASS Parks programming at all sites (proposed for FY 2013-14).
• Eliminated Pedal Boat service at Balboa, Echo Park, and MacArthur Lakes.
• Eliminated Licensed Child Care services at 24 sites.
• Eliminated Therapeutic specialized services at three (3) sites.
• Eliminated all Citywide Sports Tournaments.
• Closed Observatory two (2) days per week.
• Closed recreation centers & EXPO on Sundays and Holidays.
• Closed year round pools on Mondays and shortened the summer aquatic season from 10 weeks to eight (8) weeks.
• Closed 15 year round pools for three weeks during the winter break.
• Reduced seasonal pool operations by two (2) hours on weekends and by one (l) hour on weekdays.
• Closed Central Pool.
• Converted Peck Park, Hubert Humphrey and Glassell Pools from year round to seasonal.
• Reduced CLASS parks program from 47 to 37.
• Eliminated special event co-sponsorship (i.e. Salute to Recreation, Lotus Festival, etc).
• Eliminated staffing at all skate parks except one.
• Reduced summer bus trips for economically disadvantaged youth and eliminated senior citizen bus trips.
• Implemented fee increases for recreation programs, facility use, and staff support.
• Reduced Ranger services to assignment at Griffith Park only.
• Reduced dedicated staff at Senior Centers (programming conducted by part-time staff).
• Consolidated and clustered recreational staff at centers (less full-time recreational staff dedicated to each site) which lessens the hours and types of programming offered.
• Reduced equity programs such as Girls Play LA, and other low cost opportunities for disadvantaged areas.
• Eliminated RAP Senior Nutrition Program and some social services.
• Eliminated the Retired Senior Volunteer Program.
• Routed maintenance staff which reduces the "presence" of RAP staff at the park which leads to "dead park" situations.
• Reduced maintenance cleaning services provided at recreation centers! parks including: cleaning of restrooms from three (3) times per day to one-time per day, less frequent detailing of restrooms and buildings, removal of debris and trash, cleaning of gym floors, walls and other areas.
• Reduced land maintenance activities at parks including: routine maintenance, cleaning of children's play areas, refurbishment of play fields; and closure of other heavily used areas until they can be made safe and sanitary.
• Reduced facility repairs including: roofing, lighting, electrical, graffiti removal, broken windows, etc.
• Reduced hours of operation at region headquarters by one hour.
• Eliminated Wonderful Outdoor World (WOW) camping program.
• Reduced residential summer camp program and boys and girls camps by one day.
• Reduced hours of operation at Banning Museum and Civil War Drum Barracks by three (3) hours a week each.
• Reduced summer youth fishing program at Cabrillo Beach during the summer (last one was in 2008. This was offered to day camp youth from recreation centers throughout the City).
• Cut field supervision (recreation districts by a supervisor) from 13 to 11. Also eliminated the Recreation Supervisor positions that specifically oversaw the services for the Camping Division and the Senior Citizen Division. These responsibilities are now absorbed by field supervisors effective February 28, 2011.
• Eliminated Public Restroom Enhancement Program (PREP).
• Restrooms are being cleaned once a day instead of three (3) times a day and detailing of restrooms and buildings has become less frequent.
• Hiking and equestrian trails do not receive routine maintenance.
• Recreation facilities (interior) receive minimal maintenance (no detail cleaning).
• Hardscape stains remain much longer as we are unable to pressure wash on a regular basis.
• Sandbox maintenance is greatly impacted as sand is screened twice a week instead of three (3) times a week.
• Picnic areas receive minimal attention (unable to remove coals on a regular basis).
• Litter debris remain much longer on grounds, and trash cans overflow during the summer.
• Harvesting of aquatic vegetation at Machado Lake has not been performed in Fiscal Years 2008-09, 2009-10, or 2010-11.
• Motor sweeping of RAP parking lots has been reduced.
• List of athletic fields to be refurbished has been reduced by 25%.
• Line trimming and detailing of planter beds now occur on an as-needed basis instead of weekly.
• Grading of ball diamonds now takes place on an as-needed basis instead of monthly.
• Tree work is only being done on demand and on an emergency basis. The Forestry Division has been forced to abandon all preventative tree maintenance. This is exposing both our staff and patrons to an increased risk due to potential tree hazards. Additionally, due to reduced tree care staff, our backlog of tree-related emergencies has grown and our ability to respond in a timely manner has been compromised significantly.
• Loss of pest control staff has forced us to drastically reduce our preventative gopher and ground squirrel control operations as well as insect and rodent control services at our recreation centers. The result has been an increase in the number of County Health citations received by the Department.
• RAP's ability to meet its water conservation goals has been compromised due to the reduction in trained staff to make irrigation system repairs and adjustments in a timely manner. The delays result in a waste of water and/or loss of turf and plant material.

The real cost of "chargebacks" as outlined by Rec and Parks

"...although (Recreation and Parks) is one of 30+ City Departments, (Recreation and Parks) alone has contributed $151 million (19%) (almost one-fifth) to reducing the City's projected budget deficit of $800 million over these last several fiscal years through paying the indirect/support costs."

What follows is the cover letter from the Department of Recreation and Parks' formal response to the Mayor's Budget for FY14. The new budget takes another $64 million in chargebacks and $8 million in other required payments away from Recreation and Parks programming.

(typos are probably our fault.)

---
April 23, 2013
Honorable Paul Krekorian, Chair
Budget and Finance Committee
City Clerk, City Hall Room 395
Los Angeles, CA 90012
ATTN: Erika Pulst, Legislative Assistant

Dear Councilmember Krekorian:

The Department of Recreation and Parks (RAP) respectfully submits this letter to assist your Committee in providing a deeper explanation of RAP's budget. In order to understand this budget, the Council and your Committee must look at the fundamental structural changes that have occurred to RAP's budget over the past seven years. During this time, a City policy shift occurred that affected both RAP and the Library Departmental budgets. It must be noted all RAP monies are "people dollars" used to enhance quality of life, resident programs helping to keep people active and healthy, and youth programs designed to build strong citizens and, thereby, encouraging youth against gang activities. The Department must be viewed as the most non-threatening public social service agency in the City of Los Angeles and a critical arm of public safety.

Summary

The Board of Recreation and Park Commissioners understands that the City has been in a dire financial crisis since Fiscal Year (FY) 2007-08 and the need exists to effect tactical solutions anually to address the City's structural deficit. While tactical decisions are critical in effecting immediate reductions, these decisions will most assuredly affect all future operations. It should be noted that I was one of the few General Managers that openly supported the Early Retirement Incentive Program (ERIP). I did this as I had extensive knowledge and practical experience with the Federal Government when the military was faced with drastic cuts in funding which necessitated the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program, Also, ERIP provided a more sensible program to reduce personnel costs while maintaining the dignity of the exceptional employees of our City. As an aside, the City benefitted from BRAC with the addition of a long term lease for land associated with the former Air Force Base at both Fort McArthur and Whites Point Nike Site. Over the past few budgets, there have been many questions directed at RAP as to why cuts have had to be made, such as a reduction in pool hours or elimination of year-round pools, program reduction/elimination or fee increases (such as community gardens). A complete list of programs that have been reduced or eliminated is provided as Attachment A. These reductions are a direct result of budget decisions necessitated by the worst recession in our country's history.

Attachment B - click on image to enlarge

Since FY 2007-08, RAP's discretionary budget (that portion of the budget which provides programs and services) has been effectively slashed from 100% to 67% of total funding available (See Attachment B). This occurred through the aggressive application of a new City policy of cost recovery for indirect costs necessary to support the direct costs of providing services to millions of our City residents. This system of cost recovery was introduced benignly to recover taxpayer subsidies to golf operations and parking garages. I agreed with this effort, as the RAP General Fund should not subsidize costs that could be absorbed by the users and program payers. Since FY 2010-11, all of our golf operations and our parking garages are fully funded by users. There is no direct subsidy associated with our golf operations and parking garages. However, once this process began, further cost recovery efforts for indirect costs were directed against RAP's General Fund budgetary accounts. Since FY 2007-08, RAP's cumulative payments toward the City'S stated deficit of approximately $800 million has been $151 million or roughly 19% of the total City deficit (See Attachment C). The Department's annual operating budget from all sources is roughly $189 million or approximately 2.7% of the City's total budget of$7.2 billion. It should be recognized that these funds were "people dollars". These "people dollars" went to offset costs of program participation and to maintain City-owned facilities within our park system. The loss of these "people dollars" meant that RAP's full-time staff plunged from a high of over 2,100 to approximately 1,400 or a 30% drop. Additionally, part-time staff dropped from over 6,900 to approximately 3,500. The attached graphs (Attachments D and E) illustrate the increase in RAP funding indirect costs of operations and the decrease in funding for direct costs of operations or actual program dollars.

Attachment C - click to enlarge

In addition, under another new City policy, RAP was directed to begin "self-funding" a portion of its operational budget. This means RAP has to save a portion of one fiscal year's budget to fund next fiscal year's budget. This amount has grown from $1.25 million (FY 2006-07) to a proposed $7.0 million for FY 2013-14. This forces RAP into a constant "juggling act" and eliminates or reduces programs/services during the fiscal year that were to be provided, as approved during the budget process by the Council and Mayor.

Again, referring to Attachment A, RAP has made efforts to focus on core functions and has been forced to make decisions to reduce or cancel those activities that although felt important and even critical to the community, had to be reduced or eliminated as they did not fall within the core functions of a Charter established department. These cuts were not made willingly nor would have been made had the Department not had to absorb support costs of operations never born by RAP in over 100 years of its history. This list is expected to grow over the next several years as RAP is forced to expend more funds on indirect costs. The increase this next fiscal year alone is $4.0 million dollars for a total of approximately $47.5 million. RAP simply does not have the long term ability to continue to finance this level of indirect cost reimbursement to the City's General Fund nor can we continue to self-fund a portion of our own budget each year.

There is some good news; the proposed FY 2013-14 budget provides RAP some one-time City capital funding to rehabilitate and rebuild Celes King III pool and Lincoln Park pool and to install automated locks in restrooms. Separately from the budget process, RAP was able to identify some one-time funding to perform deferred maintenance to improve safety and reduce liability claims, continue some unbudgeted programs such as aquatics at Hubert Humphrey, G1assell,and Peck pools (for FY 2012-13 only) and continue to develop new parks under the 50 Parks Initiative. 


Staffing 

These last few years have been tough for both the residents and the employees. Reductions in costs have resulted in the ERIP, furloughs and layoffs. Fortunately, these tough reductions have kept our great City solvent. Unfortunately, these reductions have been accomplished without any ability to control the areas where employee reductions occurred. The ERIP took a whole level of experienced and critical managers with no ability to backfill through existing City forces. Currently, through both retirement and transfers to other City agencies, departments are losing another level of critical managers who in normal times would be groomed to take on increasing levels of management responsibilities. The City has also cut almost completely the influx in low cost new employees filling the roles of apprentice or low skilled trainable and valuable future leaders. This was a tactical decision to arrest the spiraling personnel and other employee costs but has had and will have severe detrimental costs in both service delivery and direct costs of doing a unit's work.

I will use only one work group in this discussion, our critical men and women who work as Gardener Caretakers. The Department employs over 370 men and women (from a high of 551) who fill the critical task of keeping our parks clean, green and safe for our patrons. The Department of Recreation and Parks has projected ahead some simple facts. The average age of a Gardener Caretaker is 52 years. Their tasks include but are not limited to: the cleaning of restrooms, children's play pits, bike path maintenance, maintenance of our parks, etc. Using a simple direct formula, the Department can expect to lose over 3-4% of these employees each of the next few years further depleting our workforce who are performing critical maintenance tasks. This not only effects RAP's operations but also has City wide implications. For example, RAP is provided funding ($2.0 million from the City General Fund) to perform landscape maintenance at City public buildings (non-RAP owned) but we can no longer shoulder this burden as we simply do not have the staff to complete this work. This is especially true given that RAP has continued to expand the number of parks, facilities and acreage which needs maintenance.

Additionally, cutting off the influx of new and low cost employees is driving our productive cost per unit of work. With the reduction in workforce and using more costly long term employees our cost per unit of work is up while our unit of work produced is down. More or increased cost per unit of work while decreasing work actually completed results in a productivity cost death spiral. Almost every workforce series and classification is affected by these facts. As we find our economy getting stronger, we need to take a more long term strategic vision on our City workforce and core functions.  

Fleet Equipment Replacement and Maintenance 

I would also like to bring to the attention of your Committee that RAP has been able to make productivity gains in our maintenance of parks and facilities by "routing" our gardeners. RAP established approximately 240 maintenance routes with assigned crews throughout the City. Instead of having stationary assignments, crews utilize large fleet equipment (trucks, large mowers, etc.) and small fleet equipment (small mowers, trimmers, etc.) to move from park/ facility to the next park/facility to perform critical maintenance tasks. These productivity gains are being threatened. Due to fleet reduction mandates, RAP has trimmed its fleet to extremely low levels and the large and small fleet equipment is aging. RAP has been informed that at least 62 pieces of equipment originally designated to be MICLA funded were pulled from the proposed FY 2013-2014 budget. Additionally, due to reductions in Department of General Services Fleet maintenance personnel, our equipment sits un repaired in shops. If this trend continues, eventually staff will not have the equipment it needs to adequately do their job.  

Conclusion 

Like other City Departments, RAP incurred budget reductions (positions cuts, layoffs, ERIP, etc.) over these last several fiscal years to help close the City's budget deficit. But RAP and the Library Department also incurred a new City policy of paying indirect/support costs which historically were paid from the City's General Fund on their behalf. The Library Department was somewhat assisted towards this effort with the passage of a voter approved ballot measure which allocated a larger percentage of the City's property tax dollars to them. However, RAP was not so fortunate and has had to absorb these costs from its operating budget at its same property tax allocation percentage. And although RAP is one of 30+ City Departments, RAP alone has contributed $151 million (19%) (almost one-fifth) to reducing the City's projected budget deficit of $800 million over these last several fiscal years through paying the indirect/support costs.

Another new City policy directed to RAP was to self-fund a portion of its own operating budget which is currently $3.8 million to a proposed $7.0 million in the next fiscal year. Our future ability to self-fund part of our own budget and pay $50+ million annually in indirect/support costs is not sustainable. We also have a large infrastructure of facilities that is continuing to age and the deferred maintenance list of items is continuing to grow. Something must be done to address these myriad of issues, or RAP could be facing tough decisions on whether to continue to provide highly subsidized community programs or to transition to a more passive park system dependent on for-profit or non-profit agencies to provide sports and community programming, which we don't believe any Angeleno wants to occur. We can turn this situation around but we must be treated more fairly in the future. Our budget dollars should be treated as service dollars to be used by our people to service the City's people. We are a critical arm of public safety and must work together to balance community needs against fiscal reality.  

Thank you for your continued support of the Department of Recreation and Parks. Should you have any questions, please contact me or Regina Adams, Executive Officer, at (213) 202-2633. 

JON KIRK MUKRI
General Manager  

More kids shot in Los Angeles City parks

Happened again last night:

Two shot at park during anti-gang program
July 21, 2011 | 9:39 am

And on July 14th, where it only made news because Hollywood stars were on scene:

Actors Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Pena witness real drama with LAPD
July 14, 2011

And on June 22nd. And a few other times in between that didn't make the news.


Meanwhile, it takes a full-on task force to convene in the future to address serious, well-known, ongoing operational issues at one of the large Los Angeles parks:

Problems at Harbor City park continue
July 20, 2011

So W-T-F?

The City Charter says that the responsible department is the Department of Recreation and Parks - full stop.

So where exactly has the department who is responsible for these parks been while all of this is going on?

Certainly not engaging in any significant proactive prevention.

Why isn't Recreation and Parks able to handle their parks?

Maybe you should ask your Councilperson and the Mayor that question. After all, they created and approved - unanimously -  a budget that has basically destroyed this department's ability to do much of anything, really.


------------------
Additional: 

You can keep on top of emergency calls via the web:  listen to local police and fire radio transmissions here.

The Daily News is reporting that Villaraigosa had planned to show off his "Summer Night Lights " program - the anti-gang program where two kids were shot last night - to the US Conference of Mayors tonight.

We're unable to confirm the exact location of the 911 call for a shooting at Toberman Recreation Center that came in earlier this afternoon. More when we get it.

Related:

Venice's Penmar Park Pulled From Consideration For Homeless Parking Program After Double Murder There

25% of LA's kids are obese, yet City budget drains City recreation

Today - if nothing changes - the Los Angeles City Council will be voting a budget for Recreation and Parks that kills recreation and healthy activity for LA's most at-risk kids.  Cheers!

Bringing it back to the area around Griffith Park now, guess who didn't show at the City budget hearing for Recreation and Parks to support recreation in Los Angeles? The Greater Griffith Park Neighborhood Council's newly-selected Recreation Representative, Mark F. Mauceri. Or any of the rest of the GGPNC board or committee members, for that matter.

With their selection for Recreation Representative, the GGPNC completes a series of actions by which they have effectively marginalizing the once-thriving community forum on the whole from any truly meaningful existence. The rest of the community will need only to simply step around the very loud carcass. Most people already are.

CA Budget Challenge: NextTen takes one from Villaraigosa

Or is it the other way around?  (yes)

Hey y'all: we've been invited to take the California Budget Challenge! WhooHoo!

A lot of us LA locals have written oodles on why these "budget challenge" surveys, such as Antonio's recent version, are a poor way to make decisions since they misrepresent the problems and the solutions. Rather than addressing California's fiscal problems at the root of the issues, instead the population is asked to prioritize what cuts to programs and services we will accept. As with any on-line survey, these are subject to the will of whichever special interest group can muster the biggest outrage, and hence the biggest turnout.

NextTen states that almost 200,000 have taken this challenge since 2005. It doesn't seem to have helped with the State's budget health in the following years much. On the plus side, it may get people thinking about budget issues who would not normally think about these things.

(corrected version: 3:29pm)

Richard Alarcon: Looking out for your best interests

Is Richard Alarcon looking out for your best interests, or is his tenure at CD 7 a reign of terror?

If you follow the links in the below excerpt from Alarcon's most recent e-mail blast, you will see that Councilman Alarcon has invented his own budget survey and that he is not directing his CD 7 denizens to the Mayor's official budget survey. The Mayor's survey is still open for business, by the way.

Such a rogue.

You can also follow the Zorro Marxist's escapades on Twitter, too.  En guarde! 

A MESSAGE FROM 

COUNCILMEMBER RICHARD ALARCON

------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

As you know, our country is experiencing one of the toughest economic times since the Great Depression.  Unemployment is over 13% in Los Angeles, block after block we see homes that are "for sale by bank" and we are all feeling the pinch in our own wallets.

As a Councilmember, I am faced daily with the realities of our slowed economy and a budget deficit of over $200 million dollars - with a projected shortfall of over $400 million dollars next year.

As we move forward in our budget process, I want your input on what services are of priority to you and ideas you have for increasing revenue to the City.  That is why I created a BUDGET SURVEY.  I hope you will take a moment to answer a few questions and give me your ideas on how to balance our budget.  The hard fact is, we will not get through this economic recession without eliminations of positions and cuts to service.  As we move forward, your continued input and engagement on the budget issues are welcomed and appreciated.

In this newsletter you'll find information on policy initiatives I'm working on, community events and news and other important information.  I hope you will continue to contact me and my office about upcoming events, ideas you have to help improve our communities or with concerns that we can help address.

Yours truly,

Richard Alarcón 
Councilmember, District Seven 

PS: You can now follow me on Twitter (@Richard_Alarcon) and on Facebook.  This is another great way to keep up with what's going on in CD 7.

Mayor's Budget Survey results

"Tell us (politicians) what we can take from you (citizens)" - the 2010 Edition  - is essentially over, and preliminary results are in.

Here are two results that we at GPWist who believe in healthy, strong neighborhoods can't quite stop chuckling at.... it's not exactly the result the Mayor wanted.

Looks like the majority of the rest of the City also believe in healthy, strong neighborhoods.

Antonio must simply hate the fact that parks and libraries are charter-mandated, charter-protected, and charter-funded.

The full results are here, if you can stomach the hypocrisy of the entire process.

Save parks and libraries - sign the petitions

 

Welcome to Park Library

We sure wish these folks - Parks folks and Libraries folks - would work together. As we've recently documented,  Parks and Libraries are both identically protected by the City Charter and face the exact same fate.  These constituent groups need to join forces for the most impact. As some famous guy once said,

“If we do not hang together, we shall surely hang separately.” 

                                                       ...Ben Franklin (we thought so!)

Start by signing the petitions.

Parks petition:  http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/savelaparks
Libraries petition: http://www.savelapl.org/

We do suggest you personalize them for maximum effect.

 

 Welcome to Library Park

Fleecing Parks and Libraries: part two - "The Plan " won't work

During this "sudden fiscal crisis" almost a decade in the making, the Mayor and City Council have desperately been attempting to balance the budget solely on the backs of the constituent service departments.

The departments getting cut include City Charter-protected services like the Library Department and the Department of Recreation and Parks. They do not include the LAPD and proprietary departments like LAX, the Port of Los Angeles, and the DWP.

To achieve the elusive balanced budget, facing an estimated $450 million deficit in 2010-2011 alone these specific departments including Libraries and Parks are being hit by the Mayor and Council with crippling financial cuts along with the removal of nearly half the people who actually do the jobs.

Some losses of manpower are manageable. There is a tipping point, however, beyond which having no people to do the jobs ultimately leads to no public services, no matter how carefully tasks and efficiencies are manipulated.

The public is on the losing end of these cuts, without a doubt. Services, neighborhoods, and overall quality of life in Los Angeles is forfeit under this plan.

With this kind of devastation, you just gotta ask: does the Mayor and City Council's chosen path of balancing the budget - by decimating public services and workforce - even make sense?  

Can the budget actually be balanced on the backs of these specific departments?



The budget crisis is related to the amount of monies available in the infamous General Fund.

Depending on how you choose to follow the dollars, the constituent services departments including Parks and Libraries account for less than 1/3 of the spending from the General Fund. Police and Fire - largely untouched by cuts in the Mayor and Council's plan of action - account for more than 2/3rd.

By way of the plan - and we use the term plan with tongue firmly in cheek - massive cuts are being made to the 1/3rd of the departments that provide that majority of constituent services. Some cuts being made illegally.

Yet the deficit forecast for the General Fund will continue to grow, regardless of how many cuts in this vein City leaders take. This is because the deficit is mainly due to existing pension liabilities: money currently owed and that will continue to be owed to employees at this moment in time. You can lay them off and transfer them to stop the base number from growing, but that liability - the liability that exists right now - isn't directly affected. It has a deficit that remains unfunded.

This is the "budget deficit" in question.

To repeat in the spirit of  Dave Ross's  News-Read-Real-Slow, this liability - the existing pension liability -  is not changed by laying off and transferring employees if they remain on the same pension fund.

Laying off, and transferring employees slows the growth in the base amount of pensions that must then be funded by the City in the future. It also frees up General Fund cash that can be used to pay the pension liability annually.

However, short of Chapter 9 financial reorganization, aka the "B" word, this liability is not going away. Meanwhile, City services are being slashed, slaughtered, and decimated to pay for this liability while the liability itself remains unaddressed and unresolved.



How has the plan worked so far?

Looking at how balancing the budget on the backs of the services department has hit the Department of Recreation and Parks - the stewards of Griffith Park - we get a pretty good idea of how well this approach is addressing the issue. Or not.

The General Fund budget deficits for the past two years is $700 million total ($250 mil 2009, $450 mil 2010)

The hit to the Department of Recreation and Parks looks like this.

• As of March 2010 -
• Total number of Parks:   419   (500 acres of park space and ~50 parks added in the past 5 years)
• Change in Workforce Size:   -900, -43%  (2100 employees (June 2009), to 1200 (July 2010) )
  
• Change in Actual funds for Operations:  -$62 mil, -35%   ($177 mil (June 2009) to $115 mil est  (July 2010) )

This is what the plan has done to the parks in our neighborhoods as of today.

Here is what the plan as it stands today - without any more cuts but facing a much larger pension liability - will do to the parks in our neighborhood tomorrow.  
(assuming $177 budget, City-Charter appropriations and utilities remain constant, plus full pension cost recovery in 2014-15)

Actual funds for Operations 2011-12:  -$66 mil, -37%  (actual $111 mil)
Actual funds for Operations 2012-13:  -$70 mil, -40%  (actual $107 mil)
Actual funds for Operations 2013-14:  -$74 mil, -42%  (actual $103 mil)
Actual funds for Operations 2013-14:  -$78 mil, -45%  (actual $99 mil)
Actual funds for Operations 2014-15:  -$94 mil, -53%  (actual $83 mil)

That is what the plan as it stands today will do to the parks in your neighborhood tomorrow.

But wait! Without the financial miracle the City is waiting for, the plan must address the future pension liabilities, too. Future General Fund budget deficits for the next two years total  $1.7 billion  ($700 mil 2011, $1 bil 2012)

With a future pension liability a full 59% larger facing the City in the next two years, how can the plan find any more to cut - both legally and illegally - from the Department of Recreation and Parks and other constituent service departments to balance these budgets?

Hardly looks possible, 'cause it ain't possible.

$omething else ha$ to give$$$$$... a lot.

Fleecing City Parks and Libraries: part one - Killing our Neighborhoods

Fleecing Parks and Libraries: part one
Killing our Neighborhoods

What makes your neighborhood livable? Look on any home buyers' web site and you'll see listed things like local schools, crime level, parks, and libraries.

It's a fact of life that healthy parks and libraries are integral to defining livability in our neighborhoods. How 'good' these important neighborhood components are directly affects the quality of our neighborhoods. It also affects our home and property values.

Courtesy of the Los Angeles City Council and Mayor, your neighborhoods are about to go down the toilet.

Your home values, too.

Parks and Libraries are on the chopping block, with cuts estimated to approach 50% this year alone in both budget and workforce numbers.

Similar to what happened in the immediate aftermath of the passage of Prop 13, you will be seeing closed, unmonitored, underutilized, and poorly-maintained Parks and Library facilities everywhere in Los Angeles.

Worst of all, most of the monetary cuts directly violate the City Charter.

That makes this vicious fleecing illegal.



Parks and libraries are the first things cut by politicians when times get tough. The City Charter voted in by the people in 2000 wisely made very specific provisions to protect Parks and Libraries during difficult economic times. A set percentage of assessed property tax valuation is given to the Departments of Recreation and Parks and Libraries for their operations. This amount makes up the majority of each department's annual operational budget. For 2010-2011, the City Charter-mandated appropriations for the Department of Recreation and Parks alone has been stated in City documents to be $141 million. Doing a little math gives a value of roughly $76 million for Libraries.

The will of the people in legislating support for these departments is very clear: by protecting Libraries and Parks during difficult times, the people are legislating their support for these integral parts of their neighborhoods, homes and communities.

The wisdom of City Charter authors, supporters, and the overall will of the people is being sorely tested at this very moment in time. The CAO by way of the Mayor made his recommendations via his "Three-Year Plan to Sustainability" last month to the City Council. Buried in that 270 page document are plans that will change your neighborhood permanently, and not for the better.

Under the auspices of recouping the ever-nebulous "indirect costs", the plan is to sweep as much of these departments' operational budgets as possible from them and put it back into the General Fund. However, the City Charter states specifically that the removal of these particular funds for the General Fund is prohibited.



That isn't stopping the City Council, CAO, and Mayor.

In Fleecing Parks and Libraries: Part One, the CAO recommendation sweeps City Charter-mandated funding from both departments into the General fund in two ways: by forcing the departments to pay utilities, and by forcing departments to pay pension liabilities.

Both these actions - referred to as indirect cost recovery - remove City Charter-mandated funding from Parks and Libraries and places it in the General Fund. The pension-liabilities transfer does this directly, and is therefore a clear violation of the City Charter.

The utilities charge-back is quite a bit more sneaky. This action funnels dollars Charter-mandated for Library- and Parks-use into a City-owned utility - the DWP for the most part. From the DWP, the Mayor and City Council then transfer the funds back to the General Fund for different, now unrestricted uses.

This is clearly a method of laundering Parks and Library dollars for new uses, plain and simple. It serves no other purpose.



What great savings do these crippling actions achieve? After all, we're being told over and over and over that Los Angeles is in an economic crisis. If our neighborhoods are to be trashed by the City, and they're going to do it illegally, we hope it's really really really necessary. Right?

Wrong. Although the cost to Parks and Libraries peaks out at almost 50% of their entire operational budgets, the CAO predicts the monetary savings to the General Fund at just $4 million from Recreation and Parks, and $2 million from Libraries in 2010-2011.

Crime and blight increase where lack of positive use proliferates, with untold additional costs in addressing related criminal activity. Did the CAO include these costs in his analysis? No. Did the CAO include the indirect costs related to decreasing home values, neighborhood degradation, and livability? No.

Such a catastrophic price to our home, neighborhoods, and communities for a relatively small amount of realized savings. Is this why we voted our public representatives into office?



Other questions about this fleecing must be asked.

Why does Los Angeles even have a City-owned utility if the City is charging itself internally? To avoid this exact thing was one of the arguments for acquiring the DWP in the first place.

Apparently these utilities charges are being made selectively, too, charging specific departments and department activities while ignoring others.

Where does "Shared Sacrifice" play into this when every single City department uses utilities to fulfill their individual, specific missions of serving the citizens of Los Angeles. If all are acting to perform their mission, why aren't all being charged equally?



Some members of the public are calling this laundering of City-Charter-mandated funding for Parks and Libraries 'funny money', but no one will be laughing when the impact hits our neighborhoods.

Unless neighborhoods, homeowners groups, libraries and parks supporters band together and fight to uphold the City Charter on behalf of Parks and Libraries, our neighborhoods -- all of our neighborhoods -- are in for some very bad times.

Guest editorial: Looking for that elusive pot of gold

"True Grit" sent us their personal musings on the current budget situation. True Grit could be just about anyone, but we're gonna publish this anyway because:

1. their photo is fantastic! (click it to enlarge)

2. we completely agree with True Grit's description of the Mayor's performance at City Hall yesterday. It was a terrible performance,  full of embarrassing pauses like someone was feeding him tag lines through an earpiece. When he did speak, it was in sound bytes from his speech last week about layoffs.

3. there is a hit list element to the layoff choices. Our gut feeling is that most of it appears to be punitive in nature, aimed at a General Manager or three for non-compliance. 

As for the rest of the content, we'll let y'all argue with "Mr. or Ms. Grit" as to whether they've hit the mark.

-GPW
----

Looking for that elusive pot of gold

While the Mayor and Clowncil were busy thanking each other for "working together" and making "hard decisions" about nothing, they missed the one opportunity to get the city out of the financial mess they created - they all should have jumped into their city cars and headed a few blocks north of City Hall to end of this magnificent double rainbow that miraculously appeared in the late afternoon somewhere in between Philippe's and Home Boy Industries. There, they could have found the pot of gold that would have solved the impending bankruptcy that Villaraigosa will do anything to avoid, lest it blemish his legacy.

Of course, even if the Mayor and the 15 Clowncilmembers had found the pot of gold, they would have wasted it on boondoggles.

The irony of today's Clowncil session that saw the Mayor stammer and stumble over his prepared speech of catchphrases and irrelevant platitudes, was that the people who caused this mess have the audacity to believe that they now have the answer.

The Clowncil all asked questions of the Mayor of Failure, each thinking they had something magical to suggest in the form of finding anything, anything at all that would prevent the City from having to fire one employee, let alone 1,000. The one question that nobody asked was "What will the effect of firing 1,000 employees be on the $212M deficit?" According to CAO Miguel Santana's 1,000 person hit list, it will save the City $22.7M in 2009-2010. In 2010-2011, it will save the City $66.4M. In other words, it won't make a significant difference, it might just stave off bankruptcy so the Mayor can claim he's steered the City through difficult times, and thereby rely on the public's general ignorance of reality and somehow allow Villaraigosa to move on to some other political office.

Does anyone else see just how phony baloney the Mayor's 1,000 hit list is? 4 years ago, the City employed 26,000 people, today it employs 30,000. The City's revenue has now fallen to the level it was 4 years ago. So if we're to balance the budget, the City needs to cut 4,000, not 1,000. But the Mayor cannot hide 4,000 jobs in the DWP, Airport and the Port. He can hide 360, and rely on early retirements to take care of the other 640. That's where the magical number of 1,000 comes from, and it's just as illusory as the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Recreation in LA City forfeit to "the Mayor's legacy"

Come Tuesday, the Department of Recreation and Parks may need to change its name.

While the Mayor has been meeting privately with Pete Wilson and Gray Davis on how to protect his personal legacy, the Los Angeles City Council votes Tuesday on a number of budget cuts proffered by the Mayor's Legacy Proxy (the CAO).

One of those recommendations (Agenda item 11, parts 16 and 17) actually states explicitly that it will result in the serious reduction or removal of the entire recreation function from the Department of Recreation and Parks. This year just recreation will be obliterated, in the next few years it will be the entire department.

Although the City Charter guarantees that the Department of Recreation and Parks receives at set percentage of local property taxes, it apparently has no guarantee that the Mayor and City Council cannot steal those funds after the fact. And steal they will on Tuesday.


Congratulations Antonio:

Your legacy is the destruction of affordable, easily accessible, healthy recreation for at-risk and low income youth all across Los Angeles.

Long may you be remembered for this.

Mayor to move layoffs forward

The Mayor is expected to announce that he is overriding a decision by the City Council yesterday to delay layoffs for 30 days and push them forward to early next week.

The Mayor's press conference starts at 3:45pm

Additional @4:45pm

Union coalition members point out that if the Mayor lays off their employees before July 1 2010, this will break an agreement for delayed pay raises and the City will be paying a 3% raise retroactive to July 2009 to these employees. The price?  $50-55 million.

So will the 1,000 layoffs be coming from non-coalition employees?

Additional 2-5-10:

Mayor's Budget Letter Feb4 2010

Additional @4pm:

This is from the Mayor's so-called Blog

Tough Choices to Secure Our Economic Future
...With the authority invested in me by the City Charter and the people of Los Angeles, I’m taking immediate action toward balancing this fiscal year’s budget, strengthening the city’s credit rating and restoring the city’s long-term fiscal health.

Today, I am directing the elimination of 1,000 filled, full-time position authorities and instructing the Personnel Department to immediately begin calculating layoff, displacement seniority and/or transfers of employees filling these targeted positions.

I am also instructing the Personnel Department to place general funded employees into special funded positions and proprietary departments effective February 16, 2010.

These transfers will generate savings to the city’s general fund while permitting up to 360 employees to avoid layoffs. Employees interested in volunteering for transfer to Special Funded or Proprietary departments will have until 5:00 PM on Monday, February 8 to inform their respective department heads.

I will work with the Personnel Department and our general managers to effectuate these transfers from the list of volunteers. But I will reserve my right as Mayor to transfer any employee at any time as needed to protect the City’s General and Reserve Funds.

I'm also calling on the Council to adopt an ordinance to allow City employees to retire without the usual 30 to 60 day advance application requirement. Waiving this requirement will expedite retirements and provide needed relief to the General Fund.

It will also allow those employees who are facing layoffs and who are retirement eligible to leave the City in the most humane way possible.

Finally, I am asking the City Council to move their uncommitted funds, totaling up to $40 million, into the Reserve Fund until such time that the City Reserve Fund reaches 5% of the overall budget....

Neighborhood Council Representatives
Deliver Statement to City Hall
"Honor the City Charter!"

LOS ANGELES – Neighborhood Council representatives from throughout the city are headed to City Hall to call on the Mayor and the City Council to honor the City Charter which established the neighborhood council system and which mandates appropriate funding. They take with them a BudgetLA Statement that says "At this time of financial crisis for the City, the solutions require a partnership between the elected officials at City Hall and the elected representatives of our 90 neighborhood councils." 

Neighborhood Councils exist to advise the Mayor and the City Council on City Budget priorities, to monitor the delivery of services, and to involve the community in the governance of the City of Los Angeles. The Charter goes so far as to call for periodic meetings with responsible officials of City departments.

As the CAO's "City Restructuring Proposals" are considered by the Budget and Finance Committee on Monday afternoon, Neighborhood Council leaders will stand in defense of the neighborhood council system and will position the NC system as a Funding Solution, a Communication Solution, and as a Community Building Solution. Ultimately, the NC system is an ASSET, not a LIABILITY, and it is protected by the City Charter. To that end, neighborhood councils stand as partners with the Mayor, the City Council, and the City Staff in working together for "An LA that Works!"

BudgetLA has hosted two emergency workshops which have drawn 110 different members from 47 different neighborhood councils, all focused on working together to take on bankruptcy, pensions, the delivery of city services and the reorganization of the city system. The BudgetLA position starts with two basic premises, that "everything is on the table and must be considered as we work together to solve the budget crisis, and that neighborhood councils must be at that table as partners in the process.

The NC reps have taken a full-spectrum approach to the budget crisis and believe that it is essential that the community engage with our elected officials as well as city staff to pursue Revenue innovations along with Pension reform while maintaining prioritized delivery of City Services and the implementation of Organizational improvements, all of which work together to guarantee that Los Angeles take its place as a Great City.

This past Saturday, BudgetLA opened with Alex Rubalcava who addressed LA's future on "The Road to Bankruptcy." It also featured Department of Neighborhood Empowerment's GM, BongHwan Kim and his "Vision for Neighborhood Councils" presentation. Visit CityWatchLA for a details on Saturday's BudgetLA workshop. BudgetLA will meet again on Saturday, February 13 and on Saturday, February 27 at Hollywood City Hall. Both BudgetLA sessions will start at 10:00 am.

Press Conference
Monday, February 1, 2010
12:30 pm
City Hall Rotunda
200 Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Budget & Finance Committee
Monday, February 1, 2010
1:00 pm
City Council Chambers
200 Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Budget LA meets this Saturday

BudgetLA convenes "Budget Crisis - Next Steps #2"
NC proposals for Partnership and Solutions

LOS ANGELES – BudgetLA convenes this Saturday, January 30, at 10 am with Neighborhood Council representatives and Community leaders coming together to meet with the experts in a focused session that is designed to educate, to empower, and to continue delivering budget recommendations that come from a community-based commitment to working toward immediate, short-term and long-term solutions to LA's budget crisis.

The "Budget Crisis - Next Steps #2" session will focus on answering the question "Is Pension Reform the solution to LA's Budget Crisis?" and features a guest speaker who is a recognized and respected expert in pension funding. This session is the follow-up to the powerful Budget Advisory Committee session that generated 15 "pension reform" actions that were presented to the City Council's Budget and Finance Committee this past Monday at the Van Nuys City Hall.

Saturday's workshop will include breakout sessions that will provide attendees with the opportunity to grapple with the issues and to work on specific solutions, all of which will be integrated in the second round of community recommendations that the BudgetLA community will present to the neighborhood councils for endorsement and for implementation.

To that end, NC leaders will be conducting short presentations on how neighborhood councils can best evaluate the city's budget, how to best use Board resolutions, how to file Community Impact Statements that resonate, and how they can mobilize the community to engage the Mayor and the City Council.

The fundamental position of the BudgetLA movement is that "everything is on the table and must be considered as we work together to solve the budget crisis and that neighborhood councils and community groups must be at that table as partners in the process."

BudgetLA will be meeting three times in the upcoming days, starting with Saturday, January 30 at 10 am, then Saturday, February 13 at 10 am, then again on Saturday, February 27 at 10 am. All meetings will take place at the Hollywood City Hall, 6501 Fountain Ave., Hollywood 90028.

LA's Budget Crisis is of such epic proportions that City Council President Eric Garcetti has announced that beginning next week, the Council would devote two of their three meetings each week to the budget crisis and job creation.

The NC reps have taken a full-spectrum approach to the budget crisis and believe that it is essential that the community engage with our elected officials as well as city staff to pursue Revenue innovations along with Pension reform while maintaining prioritized delivery of City Services and the implementation of Organizational improvements, all of which work together to guarantee that Los Angeles take its place as a Great City.

Through it all, the City Council's Budget and Finance Committee has committed to holding four community budget meetings around the city in preparation of the 2010-2011 Budget. The first meeting took place this past Monday and the next meeting is on Monday, February 22nd at 6:00 pm at Hamilton High School, 955 South Robertson Boulevard, Los Angeles 90034.

B&F Comm members snub BudgetLA, SF Valley

Last night at Van Nuys city hall was the lone B&F roadshow hearing for the San Fernando Valley. I dutifully hauled myself down there to participate in the public process, hoping that some semblance of rational thought had finally crept into the City's plan for addressing a historic budget crisis.

Silly me.

Thirty or so members of the public were there, but most of the committee itself wasn't: Paul Koretz, Jan Perry, and Bill Rosendahl didn't bother to show. I'm sure they had good reasons they couldn't make it. (It's tough being a rock star.) Greig Smith and chair Bernard Parks were there, but even they know that two of five does not constitute a quorum.

Nice way to snub the Valley, guys.

As for the hearing itself, the CAO did most of the talking and all of it was the usual garbage we've read in the papers and blogs, sounding pretty much like a certain Gary Larson cartoon:

"Mayor is in charge and on course blah blah economic downturn blah blah couldn't see it coming blah blah layoffs the only answer blah blah blah hiring more police blah blaaaaaah blah layoffs done in a considered fashion is the cure blah blah pension reform blah blah never bankruptcy blah blah . "

With his speech, the CAO proved himself to be the most shameless mouthpiece for the Mayor there is - even more so than the LA Times. One hopes the masses out there understand this when they read a quote or hear a sound byte from that office.

Noteworthy is that the CAO did not admit that the considered layoffs are simply to cut 1000 employees with less than five years on the job, regardless to impact on services.

At this point in the Budget soap opera, it is clear the Mayor has assigned himself to be the defacto General Manager of the entire city, making all major managerial decisions for every department in town. When the entire house of cards crashes - and it will - Villaraigosa will need to have himself fired. It's all his show - he's defining course of action and is controlling the execution. (good word, 'execution'.)


As advertised, the BudgetLA folks were indeed at the hearing in force with measured discussion about solutions, transparency, bankruptcy, and having a seat at the table. Since most of their commentary made sense, they were resoundingly ignored. Bernard Parks was too busy texting while most of them were speaking to absorb much of what was said, anyway.

The level of commentary aimed at the public by Parks and somewhat by the CAO was really simplistic, to the point of being patronizing. Yes, they didn't have a quorum, but what the committee did have was a room of people who had a clue about the budget situation. Rather than engaging in informed discussion which the City Attorney did say the committee sans quorum could do, the message was in essence:

'This is a complex problem, and all you little children don't have a clue what you are talking about. Let the grown-ups worry about it. Here's your milk and cookies. 'Nite 'nite.'


It probably goes without saying, but the lone B&F roadshow hearing in the San Fernando Valley was a complete waste of anyones' time if you actually care about the City. I left very seriously thinking that it is time for the Valley to cut loose the City Hall baggage and secede.

A lot of Valley people who have recently run for public office were actually in the audience last night. Wondering if Pete Sanchez, Tamar Galatzan, Mike McCue, Noel Weiss, and Zuma Dogg - a Valley guy at heart - all has the same 'secession' feeling I did.

BudgetLA, neighborhood councils & public present budget action plan Monday

Update: Ron Kaye has the details here.
----

In a daylong meeting yesterday at Hollywood City Hall, a dedicated and knowledgeable group of community members joined BudgetLA to finalize the first white paper addressing solutions to LA's budget crisis.

The Mayor's budget for 2010-2011 as it stand now means major losses of public services and loss of jobs, leading to possible bankruptcy in the immediate future for Los Angeles.

The BudgetLA people brought out professionals from the community and neighborhood councils who are well versed in sustainable budgeting, pensions, and investing to develop a concrete, comprehensive plan of action -- something very seriously missing from City Hall to date.

Join BudgetLA, activists, and concerned members of the community for a rally and press conference outside Van Nuys City Hall immediately proceeding the first City Council Budget & Finance Committee public hearing on Monday night at 6pm.

More when we know more.

Neighborhood councils scramble for real impact on the fiscal crisis

As neighborhood councils scramble to do something significant during the City's fiscal meltdown, they're calling yet another meeting - never enough of those you know - while continuing to line up like lemmings for the Mayor's Budget Survey - whee! 

I guess we've said our piece about the shamelessly biased budget survey. The City's real financial problems are not magically erased by the Budget Survey's General-Funded services hatchet game. The Budget Survey attempts to force you to balance the City's budget by cutting General Fund services only. City parks and recreational services are unfortunately one of these easy targets because the Department of Recreation and Parks is partially funded through the City's General Fund. Lots and lots and lots of other services and programming are not.

Paul Hatfield rightfully pointed out at Village to Village that governance by survey is a terrible method. He is more than right on that account, but a terrible idea has never stopped our City leaders before.

Jack Humphreville actually gets at the real heart of our complaint about the Mayor's joke process in today's CityWatch.  In Los Angeles, there is a  four-year budget deficit of over $3 billion, an unfunded pension liability of $11.5 billion which is not impacted in any way by the proposed pension restructuring, and crumbling City infrastructure that needs an investment of at least $10 billion. Of course, the more Antonio can shuffle, blur, confuse, and obfuscate, the faster he'll be long gone and it'll be someone else's problem. Our problem. Your and my problem. The People of Los Angeles's problem.If we're still trying to live here.

OK, so who knows? Maybe the NC meeting this Sunday might produce some action. Let's see what, if anything, comes out of it. Meanwhile, boycott the Mayor's Budget Survey and think about feeding it to him for lunch - if you can actually find him in town.
-----

Emergency Meeting of Neighborhood Council Representatives and Leaders
   
Subject: LA’s Financial and Services Crisis and what NCs can do about it

• Sunday, January 10 (1:30 sharp)
   Hollywood Constituent Center
   6501 Fountain Ave (just west of Vine/just south of Sunset)

• ALL LA Neighborhood Council board members/representatives invited
Open to the public

Mayors Budget Survey: irrelevant in 2010

Boycott the Mayor's Budget Survey

It's that time of year again in the Mayor's office: time to make the citizenry decide what services they can and will do without in the next budget year under the guise of "empowerment". It's become an annual ritual, and  like a competitor of PT Barnum once voiced, Antonio Villaraigosa is betting that there isn't just one born every second, but that they will keep coming back year after year.

What does this budget survey hope to accomplish? If anyone thinks for one second that the Mayor's budget survey process isn't biased or that it has any real relevance in an unprecedented fiscal crisis, then they must be on multiple mind-altering substances. The survey is hardly comprehensive across City services. It basically opens with the Mayor's pet projects and projects lined up for cuts, and asks the public to be the hatchet man.

Yet in 2010, Los Angeles is facing a budget situation never before seen  in its history. Entire restructuring and consolidations of departments, payrolls, and services are the only way there will be a viable budget this year. In these days of historic financial weakness, this survey game of the Mayor's isn't just obsolete, it is a smokescreen for what is really happening in Los Angeles - a complete financial meltdown that may yet be followed by actual bankruptcy.

Since the Mayor first introduced his survey as a way to appear the public had a voice in the process of spending their money, Los Angeles's neighborhood councils have dutifully jumped through the Mayor's budget survey hoops. One assumes that the fear of not having a say-so in even what is assuredly a fixed game has kept them playing the sucker role year after year.
  
Now in 2010, it's time to say NO. Taxpayers should not be handing a lame-duck Mayor the means to defend his personal budget choices by putting it on the backs of the neighborhood councils. The Mayor should be forced to defend his choices in public hearings, where everyone has a chance to hand him a piece of their minds ... in two minutes or less... if they're lucky.

Better yet, it is time Neighborhood Councils held their own budget summit. Witness the defeat of Measure B.  Neighborhood Councils are powerful en masse. If they chose to boycott this farce and do it their way, Tony and his fifteen fiefs would have to listen.

From:
Date: December 29, 2009
To: Neighborhood Council Friends and Colleagues
From: BongHwan (BH) Kim, General Manager, Department of Neighborhood Empowerment

Dear Neighborhood Council Members:

The Mayor's Office is launching the Fiscal Year 2010 -11 Budget Survey, the "LA Budget Challenge," an interactive online survey that allows Angelenos to provide direct input on real budget issues that the City is facing, by participating in a budget balancing simulation exercise. The LA Budget Challenge survey is also designed to educate users on the actual development of the City budget, which will be particularly challenging during Fiscal Year 2010 -11. Please visit the survey site at http://labudgetchallenge.lacity.org/budgetchallenge/sim/budget_master.html and be among the first to take the survey!

As an important part of the annual budget development process, the City Charter requires that each Neighborhood Council have the opportunity to present the Mayor and the City Council with a list of priorities for the City budget. Over the past four years, Mayor Villaraigosa has implemented a structured process to ensure that all Neighborhood Councils and community members have the opportunity to become informed about the proposed City budget and have the ability to submit their ideas, comments, and budget priorities directly to his Office.

The Los Angeles Budget Challenge survey asks respondents to address next year's projected General Fund budget deficit of approximately $400 million by making decisions on reductions to programs and services, implementing Citywide cost-cutting measures, and by raising revenue through taxes or other initiatives While completing the Los Angeles Budget Challenge survey, participants will receive educational information about the City's finances and opportunities for community input, thereby making the City budget process more transparent and accessible for all Angelenos. Responses to the Los Angeles Budget Challenge will be compiled, analyzed and presented to Neighborhood Council budget representatives and community members at a budget workshop meeting in early March 2010. Participants will be able to provide additional input on budget priorities, as well as take part in a valuable dialogue on City budget issues. The Mayor's Office licensed the budget challenge software from Next 10, a non-partisan, non-profit organization that in 2005 released the "California Budget Challenge" survey to engage Californians in the State budget process. Next 10 can be visited at www.nextten.org or at http://www.nextten=

Original image from http://mrsfligs.blogspot.com/