COMMENTARY

“Generic talk about fiscal responsibility is cheap, even when it is plastered on giant post cards. Voters deserve specifics from the challengers about where they would cut spending and how they would treat the City’s most valuable asset, its employees.”

MARK SCHUMANN

Three of five Vero Beach City Council candidates, Laura Moss, Brian Heady and Harry Howle, all contend a tax increase for the coming fiscal year was unnecessary. Rather, they argue that despite higher pension and health insurance costs the budget could have been balanced without additional revenues.

The important question, which none of the three challenges has answered, is where they would cut current staffing and services, or other expenses, in order to avoid a tax increase.  It is the same question Councilwoman Pilar Turner declined to answer, when she cast the lone dissenting vote on the 2015/2016 budget.

Even Turner approved of converting the pension fund from defined benefit to defined contribution. That conversion, though it makes sense in long-term, increased costs in the short-term. If the three challenger propose not to raise taxes, where would they cut expenses to offset increased pension costs?

Another unavoidable cost increase is health insurance. Short of raising taxes, how would Moss, Heady and Howle cover these expenses? Given that personnel costs are 81 percent of the General Fund budget, finding a cheaper source for paper clips isn’t the answer.  Staffing cuts would be necessary.

In fact, to maintain current taxing levels, a decrease of 12 or more full time employees would be required from the proposed 2015/16 budget. Layoffs would come with significant exit costs, and would disrupt operations.

Howle claims he is going to save money by selling the electric system, but that is certainly not going to happen in the next fiscal year, if ever.  If you pay close attention to Howle’s platform, he is advocating litigation against the the OUC, the Florida Municipal Power Agency and All Aboard Florida. How is he going to pay for more litigation? By laying off still more City employees?

And how about the budgeted raise for City staff? Would the three challengers ask the City’s competent and dedicated workers to go another year without a raise? If so, with what justification? Vero Beach has one of the lowest property tax rates in the state. Is remaining in the bottom 25th percentile on this metric more important than treating the City’s employees fairly?

Vero Beach’s employees deserve better than to be asked to go several years without a cost of living adjustments. All employees, whether in the public or the private sector, deserve just compensation.

There is plenty of time between now and election day for Moss, Heady and Howle to offer their own alternative budgets for 2015/2016.  Generic talk about fiscal responsibility is cheap, even when it is plastered on giant post cards. Voters deserve specifics from the challengers about where they would cut spending and how they would treat the City’s most valuable asset, its employees.