BY MARK SCHUMANN
In less than two months, the Vero Beach City Council will set a budget for fiscal year 2013-2014. If citizens concerned about preserving what is unique about our community, that is keeping Vero Vero, are not vigilant and outspoken, they may find Council members Tracy Carroll, Craig Fletcher and Pilar Turner using the pending sale of the electric system as an excuse to hack away at city services, as they do the dirty work for the local Tea Party and Taxpayers Association, two organizations whose leaders worship at the alter of “limited” government.
Anyone still doubting that extremist views on the rightful role of government have firmly taken root in City Hall need only consider the fact that City Manager Jim O’Connor, acting, he says, at the direction of the Council, is planning to cut the general fund budget 10.9 percent beginning October 1.
These cuts, amounting to $2 million, are more than twice what will be needed to balance the general fund in the coming year, if, that is, the sale of the electric system goes through before October 1, 2014 – and that is about as likely as the Israelis and Palestinians signing a peace accord any time soon.
Not only are Carroll, Fletcher and Turner refusing to consider raising taxes to help close the projected $1 million budget gap that will result from the sale of the electric system, they are calling for and additional $1 million in cuts, which are sure to result in layoffs and diminished services.
Here are the numbers. If the electric system were sold on January 1, 2014, the city would need to find approximately $1 million in savings, or it would need to raise taxes and fees by $1 million, or employ some combination of the two.
But the Council majority is pushing for budget cuts totaling $2 million. Do they think the city is paying too much for paper clips? Hardly!
Carroll, Fletcher and Turner are well aware that 80 percent of general fund expenses go to pay for salaries and benefits. Yet, they are proposed austerity measures which will result in the elimination of what they and their supporters must consider to be “non-essential” services.
Exactly what services they have in mind jettisoning no one knows, because Carroll, Fletcher and Turner have so far failed to be specific about where the city can cut an additional 10.9 percent in spending.
Councilman Richard Winger is making a case for first determining how the current level of services can be delivered more efficiently. Unlike the Council troika, Winger is not advocating deep budget cuts that will lead to laying off lifeguards and police dispatchers.
But the restructuring Winger envisions will only go so far in closing a $1 million budget gap. Assuming $500,000 in savings can be achieved by consolidating offices and working more efficiently, the city is still going to need to cut spending another $500,000 or raise taxes by at least 12.5 percent.
Whatever savings can be gains by restructuring should be implemented as soon as possible. The tax increase, if one is necessary, need not go into effect until the sale of the electric system, which is likely not going to take place until late 2016.
The path Winger is proposing would probably lead to a combination of savings and tax increases, but most importantly, it would preserve the level of services taxpayers have grown to expect.
The Council majority would instead hack $2 million from the budget – the first step in what will become the City’s long death march to consolidation with the County.
The approach Wingers is advocating would, as he puts it, “keep Vero Vero,” by determining the most efficient way to deliver and fund the level of services the public wants, without giving undue weight to the advice of the “limited” government crowd.
In contrast, others seem set on pushing for a level of budget cuts that will result in less lifeguard protection, restricted hours of operation at Leisure Square and further trimming in the police department.
Make no mistake about it; this is a struggle for the soul of the city, which, whether the “limited” government crowd realizes it or now, is the heart of Indian River County.
Indian River Guardian 
Very well put! Caroline Ginn
What I most fear is that by the time we start seeing the change in our community, it will be too late. I read an article in the PJ about how city police times might be slower response and that they may have to get rid of an actual human to be in the front at the police station along with recreation department cuts which are the group that are behind the scenes for all our major community functions and even lifeguards not on certain beaches. For a town that gets so much of our tax dollars from tourists that seems like a move that will cut our own throats. If I was a realtor, I would be paying attention because when the quality of life goes down, there goes the reason for people to stop wanting to come to such a special place to live.
I do not think that people need to fear a loss of the COVB attributes because the “leaders” are merely engaging in scare tactics. There are many areas where the budget could be easily cut with no negative impact on the community. Also, it is long past time for a serious discussion on how to augment the revenue stream. People tend to forget that accounting ledgers have two sides.