Does the Council have priorities right? Facing a budget crunch, the Council appears prepared to sacrifice existing services and infrastructure in order to let $3.7 remain allocated for a resort-style tennis complex.
For the past three years the Tennis Club requested adding one new tennis court to the current seven. On Monday evening the Club was the dominant force in the audience at the budget workshop, seeking to save plans for the multi-million dollar, resort-style complex inspired by the ’designers’ in City Hall - instead of one court. Installing a single court could save the City over $3 million for balancing the budget without raiding reserves.
Instead the Council will approve 1) cuts of $350,000 from library services, 2) $400,000 from slope renovation on Marguerite, 3) significant maintenance reductions to sports fields, 4) cutbacks to park maintenance, 5) lengthened street striping cycles, 6) elimination of street light ornamentation, 7) further reduction in Christmas lighting, 
longer response time for service requests, 9) substantial reduction in funds for replacement and maintenance of computers and information technology, 10) elimination of wreaths for vets’ holidays, 11) dropping of earthquake insurance for Marguerite Complex, and other reductions and deletions.
The Council did not describe or discuss these cutbacks in front of the Tennis Club and audience Monday. Staff incorporated the cuts into the proposed budget which will be approved July 20.
In addition to the above cuts, the City will divert $2.1 million from reserves previously allocated for other purposes, and the Council will plan using another $2 million in park fees due from Target Corporation, if-and-when it sells the adjacent vacant ‘Steadfast’ property at Los Alisos and Jeronimo.
In addition to General Fund revenues being short of expenses by $3 million over the next two years, that deficit could double if Sacramento decides to usurp the maximum amount of city gas revenues from cities to help resolve the State deficit.
City Treasurer Irwin Bornstein advised the councilmembers he didn’t expect Mission Viejo’s revenue stream to be restored until 2013-2014. Nevertheless, instead of discussing modification of the tennis plan, the Council seemed to be putting lipstick on the pig, defending the City’s financial gyrations.
Cathy Schlicht questioned the value of the budget workshop. “I’m not happy with the way the meeting is being run, because what are we doing?” she said. ”We’re just spending money instead of looking at ways to save money.”
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
As I understand it the City has about a 50% reserve fund. Which is about 100% of many other cities and business, so we are not in bad shape. Could we do better, of course. The tennis court funds have been set aside and committed. What no one sees from Councilwomen Schlicht is ideas or solutions just carping. She and other critic should roll up their collective sleeves and offer the Council relevant and creative ideas, rather then pointing out what they perceive as lack of Council oversight. Anyone can criticize, it takes real talent to find a different path to the same goal. Sound fiscal responsibility.
What? We’re facing a budget crisis? Let’s vote ourselves some more pay increases. It’s a good thing we got ourselves lifetime health benefits back when times were good.
Give me a break! Local government is staffed by the same shortsighted mentality that the state government is. And, the worst part is, somebody keeps reelecting these idiots!
What Planet is our city goverment and council living on? Austerity is what we are looking fo – not free spending stupidity, carelessness and saying go to hell to the electorate by our inept city administration and MUK council. Please wake up and listen to the people who are paying the bills – we your electorate. Stop spending. Instead, ise it up, make do, wear it out, or do without. That is what my parents did during the Great Depression and theirs was the “Greatest Generation”. Contrast that with what they will be calling the MUKsters and the city hall staff very soon. Lets just recall the MUKsters and start with new financially responsible leaders.
Once again a special interest, that has little interest in the balance of the community, persuaded these council members to abandon the rest of the community. So the tennis crowd keeps on serving up out-of-bound serves while our children’s library services are canceled. That is just a wonderful choice isn’t it?
I had to laugh when Trish Kelley said it had been part of our budget. She failed to understand that the revenue side of that budget was being dramatically reduced due to the economic downturn we are experiencing. I guess Trish Kelley lives in a parallel universe wearing rose color glasses.
So infrastructure continues to be ignored while overcost projects continue to plague Mission Viejo. Thanks Kelley, Ury, MacLean and Ledesma – your fantastic!
Our council is moving forward on a project that will over-run its budget and force out budget items that provide more general opportunities than a tennis complex to satisfy a very small percentage of our city.
And as if the city planners have not memtioned that they have no idea what our state is going to do to our revenue, our city council is going to spend that money anyway. The reduction in revenue identified so far is only the tip of the revenue reduction iceberg. Since we do not know what that is, a responsible city council needs to stop funding that tennis project for at least a couple of years or even forever.
To make financial matters more embarrassing, Mission Viejo is far less advantaged than our “sister” cities – San Clemente, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Hills, Lake Forest, RSM, and Aliso Viejo – who haven’t encumbered their general fund with heavy bonded indebtedness for lavish facilities. Our general fund debt is about $18 million, which requires almost $2,000,000 in payments yearly.
Instead of building in moderation over the years, our leaders have chosen to build irresponsibly, so that now the continuing needs of our residents can’t be met. To accommodate this $4 million Tennis Center, hundreds of thousands of dollars must be cut from our regular services to the residents – including library materials and programs, and public services such as sports fields maintenance, playgrounds and landscaping maintenance, recreation and community services, technology replacements, no earthquake insurance for our facilities. And we are still $3 million short, and that may increase when the state comes after more money from our treasury.
And yet Dennis Wilberg – City Manager, Keith Rattay – Director of Public Services, Kelly Doyle – Director of Recreational Community Services, and our majority council Kelley, Ury and MacLean have the consciousness to move ahead anyway with the Tennis Center without amending it to a more modest plan. Their spending is a runaway train.
Our facilities are terribly costly to maintain and consequently “the rubber is now meeting the road.” Our revenues and reserves are declining. THERE IS NO MONEY FOR NEW CITY PROJECTS WITHOUT CANCELLING OR DEPLETING OUR CITY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
And our Council Member Schlicht gets shut down by the Mayor when she recommends further analysis and a more careful look at how we’re allocating what income and savings we have.
I guess our only recourse is to get them the heck out of office. What a bunch of boobs! If they had a brain between them we would be lucky – as it is they have no grasp on how serious the constituency is to have them stop spending and use common and fiscal sense. They are acting in a fiscally unsound manner. What can we do when they are fiducially irresponsible? Get them out of their beloved city hall.
It should be noted that $25 million, or most of the reserves, are set aside for facilities and equipment replacement. City Treasurer Irwin Bornstein has declared these to be discretionary reserves, implying the city has ample funds for non-essential spending.
Compared to other cities, our replacement reserves should be proportionately higher because we have so many more parks, ball fields and luxury facilities in proportion to population than almost all other cities. Otherwise our superior quality of life will decline in Mission Viejo.