Even though Grand Marais city councilors devoted their Aug. 12 work session to a discussion of next year’s budget, City Administrator Mike Roth cautioned that until two key factors are determined — the amount of state aid the city will receive, and the amount of support the city will get from the county for swimming pool operations — a clear picture of the 2010 spending plan cannot be presented.
Council hopes to set its preliminary levy at the first meeting in September; after that, the figures cannot be increased, but may be decreased, before final adoption at the end of the year. In preparation, department heads have been working on their budget proposals and will meet with council in special meetings later this month to present their requests.
Roth said that, as usual, wages will account for the largest chunk of the expenditures. However, because the wages are already set by union contract, there is little that can be done by way of adjustment. The city’s total payroll for 2010 is expected to be about $1.3 million, of which $523,868 will come from the general fund — approximately $10,000 more than in 2009. The city has 22 full-time employees, 14 of whom are in the union.
Turning next to Local Government Aid, which the city receives from the state in two payments per year, Roth said the city has already made some adjustments, but must be prepared to make more as the funds continue to dwindle. In fact, said Roth, it is possible that the Local Government Aid program itself may be at risk as the state struggles to make up its $7 billion deficit.
The city’s portion of Local Government Aid has decreased from $184,209 in 2008 to $96,422 in 2010. That’s a decrease of $87,787 in two years, said Roth, and comes after unbudgeted decreases of about $40,000 in 2008 and $31,000 to date this year (the city is still awaiting this year’s second payment from the state, about $75,000).
Roth said the city has been able to absorb those cuts so far, thanks to a healthy general fund and its diverse income sources, particularly the liquor store and Rec. Park. But if further cuts are needed, council will have few options other than to reduce services, raise taxes or lay off staff — options which councilors have said they want to avoid if at all possible.
Financing and maintenance of the city’s municipal swimming pool prompted a lengthy discussion. Roth pointed out that the pool lost approximately $219,000 in 2008, and “the number’s not getting any smaller this year.” The loss has been supported with Rec. Park profits and levy dollars, but councilors stressed that the city cannot continue to bear such losses year after year.
Councilors also expressed disappointment and frustration with the Cook County commissioners, who said during an April meeting with city officials that they would be willing to pay for up to half of the pool’s expenses this year. But since then, the matter has not come before the county board for a vote, nor has anybody from the county contacted the city with an explanation or update.
Roth said it appears the city’s best course of action is to pursue its request during the county’s budget process, and hope to get some support for next year. “Thepool is a big part of the 2010 budget, and it could lead to some five-digit changes,” observed Roth. “And it could be a budget-breaker next year.”
Councilors agreed that some level of financial help from the county is vital if the pool is to be maintained.
“The county board has to realize we can’t continue to absorb this increasing cost when more than a third of the pool users do not live in the city,” said Councilor Bill Lenz. “We can’t do this forever.”
Said councilor Tim Kennedy, “We need to get the county board to commit to some kind of action,” and Mayor Sue Hakes observed that community planners can’t simply stand by and wait for completion of a proposed community center to include a pool. “We can’t wait for a community center,” said Hakes. “It could be five years…or never.”
Councilor Jan Sivertson went so far as to suggest that the county board be given an ultimatum: if they don’t come up with some pool money in next year’s budget, then the facility will be closed forthwith. However, other councilors said that option was a bit too harsh. Instead, they agreed to attend the city’s scheduled budget session with the county board “in force” and again make a formal request to have the pool included in the county’s 2010 budget. Kennedy also suggested that perhaps the county has some discretionary money in its Recreation Fund account, and may be willing to allot some of that toward upkeep of the pool.
Leave a Reply