Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Council Passes Layoff Plan

Fourteen employees, including two firefighters, will lose their jobs and four more will be demoted in a layoff plan the City Council approved Monday to help bridge a $3.5 million budget shortfall.

Seventeen positions will also be eliminated in the plan, which replaces reductions to part-time employment and furloughs previously proposed. The layoffs and demotions are projected to save $416,000, while the job eliminations will result in $621,609 in projected savings.

Members of the governing body noted constraints caused by this year’s 4 percent budget cap and warned that a 2 percent cap next year will give the city even less leeway for savings without concessions from all of the city’s bargaining units.

“I believe it will get worse,” Councilman Adrian Mapp said. “More employees will be affected.”

Only two unions, the Plainfield Municipal Employees Association and the Plainfield Municipal Managers Association, have voluntarily offered concessions, City Administrator Bibi Taylor said.

Mapp said he suggested to Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs that she go to the bargaining units to get concessions that will save jobs. In response, the mayor said there had been many meetings with unions, but also noted police and fire divisions each had seven positions eliminated, “so they were impacted.” She said she is calling a meeting with all union representatives at noon Wednesday in City Hall to explore “what can we give back collectively.”

Councilman Rashid Burney also asked the administration to “think outside of the box,” saying, “next year we are going to be back here again.” Councilman Cory Storch said if police don’t give back something in the way of benefits, Correction: “staffing will be decimated over the next three years.”

Bureny, Storch, Mapp and Council President Annie McWilliams voted “yes” on the layoffs, while Councilwoman Bridget Rivers voted “no.” Rivers said she could not support the plan because she felt the administration did not vet all aspects of the plan.

“Everybody must get affected,” she said.

Firefighters dominated the large crowd that attended the special meeting, waiting first for the scheduled 8 p.m. opening that did not come until 9:30 p.m. The audience no sooner sat down in Municipal Court than McWilliams announced a closed session that all but affected employees would have to vacate.

The crowd swarmed back into the hallway, only to be told the council had decided to meet upstairs inside the adjacent police headquarters. Back in the courtroom, the audience waited until 10:22 p.m. for the special meeting to resume. After the vote on the layoff plan and another vote on an IT shared services plan with the school district, the public comment portion drew emotional pleas from affected employees to save their jobs.

On behalf of the firefighters, Fire Chief Cecil Allen said the division was down to 96 firefighters from 125 to 128 and his administrative staff was down to 8 from 19 previously. A reorganization plan put three lieutenants back into fire suppression, he said, and fire engines were going out short-staffed.

“It may not look like the Fire Division is doing its part as far as working with the administration, but I think we are,” Allen said. “We don’t have much more to give.”

Others warned that cuts to health and inspections could result in the spread of disease and even a rise in fires due to illegal occupancy of unsecured, vacant buildings.

McWilliams wondered aloud how the city got to a point of such limited resources and high taxes, calling the council’s action “just an all-around difficult decision to make.” But Taylor said the situation was not specific to Plainfield, but was endemic to other municipalities in the state and around the country.

“We are facing a paradigm shift in how we do business,” she said. “There is no short answer on how we got here.”

--Bernice Paglia

13 comments:

  1. How did we get here? A city that refuses to enforce codes, a city that refuses to put standards and practices on simple aesthetics, a city that refuses to approach the "broken window" theory realistically and refuses to enforce quality of life issues. We have no rateables and no real tax dollars coming in. What business that COULD start providing money to the city would come here and spend their hard earned money in Plainfield opening a business? Businesses look at their money as an investment. Who would invest in a community that refuses to invest in itself with something as simple as standards? Opening a business will not improve a community. A community must improve itself for the businesses to come. Simply having a train station and a large population density does not mean they are going to come here. Times Square in NYC didn't get cleaned up because businesses opened up. Businesses opened up in Times Square because the city of NY cleaned it up, enforced zoning and quality of life issues. I have never seen 50,000 clueless people in my life who simply don't get it.
    Let's put a religious spin on this for the ones who relate to it more easily. The Lord helps those who help THEMSELVES. Enforce zoning, concentrate on quality of life issues ( this alone will solve part of Plainfields problems ), set a bar that ALL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNERS MUST ABIDE BY and concentrate on standards, standards, standards.
    The city is a brand...unfortunately OUR brand looks like a YUGO on a Cadillac Dealers lot. Who the hell is gonna buy it ??
    And for the naysayers...keep waving your magic wand and throwing your pixie dust about hoping it solves the problems..it's only going to get worse. Maybe you can throw enough pixie dust around so you'll have a pile deep enough to bury your heads.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bernice - a correction on my comment about police give-backs. I said that staffing will be decimated. I was not referring to just the police staffing.

    Plainfield is between a rock and a hard place. The rock is our escalating expenses with union contracts playing a major part in the relentless increase. The hard place is flat revenues with state aid going down as property taxes go up. The revenue outlook is good in the long term if we are smart about economic development but the economy will delay progress on this front. That leaves only two short term solutions - consolidation of services/shared services and union givebacks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unless ALL unions give something back, this is going to cause huge problems in City Hall. PBA, Fire are living high and mighty. They must contribute.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't know about the rest of the unions, but I can say the fire unions do give back.We are the only one who would go to table and talk about giving something back.By them laying off two firefighters,will that fix the problem are they going to come back next year with the same problem.WILL THE MAYOR, CITY ADMINISTRTOR,AND ALL THOSE WHO GET CAR ALLOWANCE GIVE SOMETHING BACK.I thought the Mayors position was part time,then why is she working full time hours.THE COUNCILMAN, THE VP OF THE COUNCIL WHO KEEP VOTING YES FOR EVERYTHING I JUST HOPE HE DON'T NEED HELP SOME DAY FROM THE PEOPLE HE'S TRYING TO LAYOFF.It was in the news a couple of months ago were a guy didn't pay his fire taxes, and when the fire department show up they just stand there an watch the house burn.Were does all the money go,not to the fire or police thats for shore but everyone keep saying that. THE FIRE HOUSES IN CITY THE ARE FALLING A PART.I JUST HAPPEN TO STOP THERE THE OTHER DAY AND FROM WHAT I CAN SEE,I DON'T KNOW HOW THOSE FIREFIGHTER DON'T GET SICK THEIR.The news paper say that firefighter save 5 people from the fire on west 6th st,what a way to show them thanks by laying them off.It is in the council hands now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To 4:46 p.m.: The implied threat that firefighters would stand by and watch someone's home burn over a vote for layoffs is reprehensible. If that is your attitude, you need to turn in your badge.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bernice, I believe that reader may have been referring to this piece that made national headlines two months ago:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/

    ReplyDelete
  7. To 9:56 p.m.: I'm sorry, I just don't see how that translates to insinuating that a legislator might have to pay a similar price for the way he votes on a budget issue.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I know you are not crying about two firefighters when so many other people have lost their jobs to this madness. I think you should lay off more and get up the courage to hit those selfish police officer unions as well. As Councilwoman McWilliams is so fond of saying everyone has to share the pain, not one city employee is better than another. Directors, Police Officers, Firefighters, Public Works, Health and all the others put their pants on one leg at a time, so let's live up to the hype and force all hands on deck to share the burden.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Council President Annie McWilliams comment regarding how we as a City find ourselves in this fiscal dilemma merits further discussion. There are many things that contributed to Plainfield's current financial condition some of which are macroeconomic issues that are beyond our control but others are factors that municipal government both controls and determines.

    #1. Collective Agreements between the City and its Unions require particular attention to the Wage Schedule. Why? Since a large portion of Plainfield's budget consists of Fire and Police it is paramount these costs fit within the projected revenue structure. The City shouldn't approve ANY contract the taxpayers can't afford to sustain, hoping that union give-backs will be the solution to the problem. Which leads me to my next point.

    #2. 3 Year Budgeting Plans should be a requirement not an option. Fiscally responsible contracts are good for both the City and the Unions. The taxpayer doesn't like higher than expected taxes and the unions don't like give-backs. The City should be looking at projected expenditures minus projected revenues over longer periods to reduce the probability of large tax increases or service reductions to its residents.

    #3. Strategic Planning is the path back to growth and prosperity. I'm in favor of a 3-4 year Strategic Plan that the Mayor would introduce one year after the start of the Mayor's term in office. This would provide the first year of any administration the time to evaluate both current macroeconomic and financial forensic conditions that make real strategic planning possible.

    The reality is raising taxes and cutting services year after year is not sustainable and at some point will make Plainfield to expensive and unpalatable to live in. Increasing the commercial tax base is possible but it will not happen unless the city chooses to make pivotal investments that make Plainfield a better place to LiveWorkPlay. Increasing the number of high density housing developments in hopes of increasing tax revenue will only increase congestion and further exacerbate the problems Plainfield already has. I'm not a fan of Ex-President Bush but I totally agree with the comment he made regarding the soft bigotry of low expectations. We do need a paradigm shift in our thinking but not to resign ourselves into survival mode we need to become a more innovative and creative municipality. Superman isn't coming for us. Superman is in the mirror.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't understand how development or businesses will contribute to the tax base if they all get PILOT deals!

    ReplyDelete
  11. ANON 3:50pm I totally agree with you. The liberal granting of PILOTS is not good for Plainfield. Particularly when it facilitates high density residential development. The travesty is PILOTS actually shift the tax burden to existing homeowners. In addition, the projected amount of taxes that are actually collected is highly speculative. [Gross revenue minus utilities) @ at agreed upon rate]. So if the projects units are only 50% full and utility costs are high the project could end up as a net loss to the taxpayers. Not to mention not one red cent goes into our school district to pay for any additional students.

    PILOTS should only be granted when the benefit to the city outweigh the costs and not on a 30 year taxpayer gamble. On the other hand, short term PILOTS can spur commercial activity and be very effective tool in establishing a more diverse tax base.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Eliminate all of the excessive overtime collected by police officers. If Director Helwig does not know how to schedule his staff properly and effeciently he to should be forced to leave.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The statements made on this issue regarding the fire divisions refusal to give anything towards the city budget crisiis are unfounded. The reality is the fire division has suffered greater losses than anyone in this town knows or will admit. A look at past table of organizations will attest to the fact that the city of Plainfield once had a fire division with a personnel strength of 124 uniformed and civilians. That number after the current round of cuts stands at 96. Thats 28 staff members or a 23% reduction in the work force. In this round of cuts alone the division lost 8 positions not two as previously reported. So before you make unfounded claims of greed and failure to share the pain please get your facts right.

    ReplyDelete