On Wednesday, I’ll be heading to a 6 p.m. city council work study meeting at Port Orchard City Hall. The council will discuss $16,000 worth of budget cuts needed in light of its decision to maintain the city’s budget at 2009 levels. The council declined to take a one percent property tax increase in light of the recession.
Among proposed cuts are BKAT broadcasts of city council meetings, a cost of $7,900 per year, and nearly $10,000 in parks funding, including $700 a year for mutt mitts (who knew Port Orchard’s canines were so productive). The city also could renegotiate contracts to save money.
The work study is open to the public, although comments are not generally taken. The public will have a chance to comment on the city’s 2010 budget at a hearing at 7 p.m. Dec. 7. The council will vote on the budget at its regular meeting, Dec. 8.
From the city’s Web site:
“Copies of the Preliminary Budget will be available to any
interested taxpayer at a nominal charge during normal working
hours, Monday – Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the office of the
City Treasurer on November 13, 2009.
Any person or public agency interested is invited to attend the Public Hearing and/or submit written comments on the 2010 budget to the City Council on or before December 7, 2009.”
All meetings are held at City Hall, 216 Prospect St.
Hi Chris,
Everyone knows you meant renegotiate “contRacts”, but since I was going to comment anyway…
The cost cut proposals came from where? Did the City Finance Committee have an alternate proposal if the 1% did not pass? I am having trouble finding something on the City’s website, but it could be me, so if you can point me to a document, I would appreciate it.
Thanks,
Kim
Kim – I was given this information from the mayor. It is my understanding (and I will check tonight) that the finance committee and the mayor came up with this proposed list of cuts. My story on the work study meeting will run Monday. Feel free to call or e-mail me with any questions or comments. Chris Henry, SK reporter
(360) 792-9219, chenry@kitsapsun.com
Is there a reason why the preliminary 2010 budget couldn’t be PDF’d and put on the City’s website?
Regards,
Kathryn Simpson
“…$10,000 in parks funding, including $700 a year for mutt mitts (who knew Port Orchard’s canines were so productive). The city also could renegotiate contracts to save money.”
1) What is a ‘mutt mitt’?
2) Are the Dog Parks included in “parks funding”?
3) What contracts? I thought park employees maintained the parks. Yes? No?
PO/SK wouldn’t/couldn’t lump people/kids parks in with the dog parks for tax payer funding… would they?
…just asking… Sharon O’Hara
Hi Sharon,
The City does not have any “dog parks” within the city limits. The “mutt mitts” are to there to help if you forgot anything to use to pick up after their dog.
The City Council in 2008 decided they wanted to have some of the smaller parks that have been added by local service groups maintained under a contract with a landscape company. This allows the full time employee and his summer helpers to pay more attention to the larger parks.
Hope that helps,
Kim
What will I do between the time they quit BKAT and get it up to their website? I’ll be in withdrawal.
I’m always grateful for those mutt mitts. And, I always thank Kim when I got to grab one, since I don’t remember them being there prior to her term in office. I have used the ones in other communities and Port Orchard’s are better. Seriously. They open easier and are just better designed. Well worth the $700.
There won’t be any down time in between. In fact, there may be overlap between the time we begin webcasting. BKAT will run through the last council meeting of the year.
LFC
Thanks, Kim. The south end must be the Dog Capital of the state…all the dog parks, but still stock the regular parks with dog mitts costing $700/yr. Usually dog people carry their own if they usually pick up after their dog.
How far is the closest dog park from the city limits?
Since the age group least likely to have and use computers are the senior group, they lose again if the city eliminates the BKAT coverage.
The south end senior not only lack a senior center, it seems seniors will be denied the local TV coverage used to see their government in action.
That, mayor, is age discrimination. If your seniors are to be so discriminated against, it is only fitting that they be excused from paying property tax.
Sharon O’Hara
On Dec. 2 Kathryn Simpson wrote:
Is there a reason why the preliminary 2010 budget couldn’t be PDF’d and put on the City’s website?
On Dec. 7, Allan Martin responded vis e-mail to me:
“The City followed its past practices which included the website posting of the revenue hearing document. The City advertised in its public notices that the preliminary budget was on file with the City Clerk and copies could be obtained at the office of the City Treasurer.
Many cities post their Mayor’s Preliminary Budget. I think Kathryn Simpson’s question is a good one, and I will have the 2011 Preliminary Budget posted to the website.
At this point in the 2010 process, the Mayor’s Preliminary Budget has been revised by the Council Finance Committee and by the full Council at last Wednesday’s study session. As you are aware, the final budget hearing is this evening with adoption of the 2010 Budget scheduled for Tuesday night.
Going forward, the city will incorporate the website posting of the Preliminary Budget as part of its public process.”
Chris Henry, reporter
Thanks, Chris and Allan!
Regards,
Kathryn Simpson
People always TRY to carry their own, Sharon, but sometimes they run out. I remember driving through the parking lot near the library and I saw a couple out walking their dog. They were far away from one of the mutt mitt stations, when their dog decided to squat. (that’s as descriptive as I’ll get.)
I remember the expression of gratitude on their faces when I rolled down the window and handed them an extra mutt mitt I had in the car.
They serve a valuable purpose.