In keeping with Mr. Teahan’s position, this will
also be the last effort on my part to address what started out as his
belittling of public safety volunteers, referring to them as “boy scouts”.
I take exception to
Michael’s statement that I have proposed “firing 25% of the fire department
staff”. I would ask him to identify where I have stated that either in writing
or verbally. In fact, I have not proposed firing anyone from the fire
department, or for that matter, any current city employee. I do, however,
advocate reducing city staff to the 2001 level, but only through attrition.
This is a staffing level we can afford. It will avoid spending each year an
additional $50,000,000 of money we don’t have. It will stop the necessity to
borrow money in the form of long term bond debt that has now reached a
staggering $331,000,000, a portion of which goes every year into the general
fund to pay staff salaries. Since it is counted as “revenue”, it first goes
into reserve fund accounts and later is transferred into the General Fund.
Think about that for a
moment. Through a mechanism of transfers we are using long-term borrowed money
to pay for direct services we are receiving today. At the rate we are spending
it ($29.7 million this year alone), the next generation of
There are numerous positions
that have not been filled in the entry-level firefighter ranks. The staffing
model proposed by the fire chiefs I worked with will not require any lay offs.
By staffing back to three on engine and truck companies, which is the primary
staffing level in the Los Angeles County Fire Department and many other fire
departments in the region, the extra firefighters would be used to fill in the
vacant positions that occur daily due to a variety of reasons. Note: their
employee contract permits them to be off duty one out of every five or six
working days. This creates enough openings so as to avoid any layoffs.
The
Mr. Teahan’s claim that I am
“beating public safety professionals over the head with a stick” is the kind of
rhetoric that amuses and also stuns me. I have never used that kind of
language, but others have in describing my views. The issues I have with the
fire department have to do with policy and not personal attacks. It is policy
that I argue. I do not bash people who have chosen any kind of profession, but
I reserve the right to criticize policies of tax supported public agencies.
Just last evening I ran into Fire Chief Harold Scoggins. During a short
conversation he acknowledged that my only issues with his department have to do
with policy. Just because policy issues can be lively and sometimes heated,
does not mean that those serving in the profession are being “beaten with a
stick”.
One example had to do with
the policy that allowed firefighters to drive out of their districts or to
remote areas to jog in tennis shoes and shorts up to a quarter of a mile away
from their emergency response vehicles. My audit revealed that while engaged in
this activity, the emergency response delays on medical and fire emergency
calls were, on average, double their normal response times. The fire department
initially ignored my data, but when I presented my findings to the city
council, the fire chief cancelled the policy and acknowledged that it was
causing long response delays. That policy had been in effect for over ten years
and even though they all knew it was causing delays, no one in management or the
union took steps to rescind it.
This has not sat well with
the firefighters because they enjoyed this activity, but we have to demand that
they put the public’s safety needs before their personal interests. There are
many other policies that continue to cause emergency response delays that the
city council refuses to address. It is quite telling when no one in the fire
department, management or union, is willing to debate these policies in front
of a group of citizens.
In response to his
accusation that I, “constantly refer to their agenda, culture of fiscal abuse
and addiction to overtime”, I offer the following. Regarding agenda: refer to
the above paragraphs on policies that cause emergency response delays.
Regarding fiscal abuse: over the last five years, the city council has tried to
get fire management to put controls on the amount of overtime (over $6 million
last year, averaging $35,000 per firefighter), yet no progress to date has
occurred. Regarding the addiction to overtime, I only quoted a statement
released by the
Last, but not least, is Mr.
Teahan’s comments having to do with why I moved to Glendale and that it
“reveals much about his real agenda and demonstrates the truly great things in
Glendale about which he might be missing”. I did not see Mr. Teahan in the
audience several weeks ago when the city council held a special study session
on the budget. If he had been there he would have learned that the additional
deficit in this year’s budget is forecast to be another $8 million (according
to Mr. Najarian and Mr. Quintero) or up to $12 to $15 million (according to Mr.
Yousefian). This is in addition to the original $10 million shortfall projected
last April. This $18 to $25 million deficit is only in the general fund. When
all “Government Fund” balances are taken into account, the city is reporting a
deficit of $88,000,000. The city says don’t worry, they will still be able to
balance the budget. Remember they still have some of the $331 million they
borrowed since 2002, but at this rate, it won’t last much longer.
The Director of Finance, Mr.
Bob Elliot, told the city council on the morning of the special budget study
session, that if the public safety departments are left out of any
considerations for reductions in their budgets, the Library and Parks
Departments, as well as others, will have to suffer up to 30% reductions. What
“great things” we might be missing in
I am fighting to keep all
city departments viable and whole while balancing all services and programs
that have made
Bruce Philpott