Council debates talk of public safety
Miller wants to discuss making fire, police priorities
A couple of Yuma City Council members want to start talking about making public safety — fire and police — a priority when it comes to funding and asked to talk about it at the next meeting. However, other council members voted against it, saying it could only be a philosophical conversation at this point since budget numbers aren’t ready.
During the Oct. 18 meeting, when Mayor Doug Nicholls asked for items councilors would like to add to future agendas, Councilman Jacob Miller requested a discussion on public safety and how the city could make it a funding priority.
“The only reason I ask for that is because I think we as the council need to see where we’re headed and what the plan is,” Miller said.
Nicholls said it’s too early to discuss budget items. “If you want to talk philosophical as far as priorities on council, we can do that, that’s usually a retreat item,” he said.
City Administrator Greg Wilkinson reiterated that there are no budget numbers at this point to bring to the council.
“I’m not trying to push this off,” Wilkinson said. “We’re only three months into the fiscal year. We don’t have any projections yet. We think the numbers will be pretty good because winter visitors look like they’re going to be a lot higher.”
He explained that at the council retreat scheduled for January “we get to hear from all departments individually, council can throw out their goals, and then we use this information to put the budget together.”
“Miller clarified that he’s not necessarily looking for numbers. “I’m looking for how are we going to prioritize public safety,” he said, adding that by the time of the retreat, the budget was already set and the council did not have an opportunity to give direction.
“No, it’s not done,” Wilkinson said, pointing out the departments are just starting to put together their budgets.
Nicholls stressed the council has always given
direction during the yearly retreat.
“We’ve always provided direction and staff is very responsive to that. I think it’s a lot of work to force a budget discussion three months before the budget discussion would happen because it’s a lot of work to get those numbers together.
“You say not to talk about numbers, but you have to talk about numbers if you’re talking exactly how the priorities are going to stretch out. I really don’t think having that part of the discussion makes any sense … It’s not good use of staff time and the public’s time if it’s going to be redone three months later when we actually have real numbers.”
Councilman Gary Wright spoke in support of Miller, saying, “The budget is not just about numbers … I see a benefit in this because it gives an opportunity to council to discuss the direction we need to go, goals and objectives and things we would like to see happen with public safety. The numbers will follow. It gives the public an opportunity to hear what the council considers very important items in public safety. So I think that discussion would not be a waste of time.”
Councilman Mike Sheldon disagreed. “Money drives it all so without the figures I don’t see the point of that point. I’d rather wait until closer to the normal time.”
Miller emphasized that the public safety discussion has to start now. “I think we’re doing public safety a disservice by just waiting for that time when we have a retreat,” he said.
Deputy Mayor Gary Knight, who attended the meeting by telephone, pointed out that the council election is coming up shortly, which will result with at least two new members on the council. He said the council should wait for their input as well.
“They may have new ideas, better ideas, something different than what we consider the last two months of this year, and we owe it to them to let them have a voice in this,” Knight said.
Nicholls called for a vote; the motion failed with Miller and Wright voting the public safety discussion and the rest of the council members opposing it.
Sheldon explained his vote. “We need concrete stuff, and fire and police needs to let us know what their current needs are … No one is anti-public safety. But we need concrete things
to hook our feelings on.”
Miller also said he would like to hear more about the city’s plan and outlook for the local Public Safety Personnel Retirement System as well as a discussion on the Highway User Revenue Fund, which has been repeatedly swept by the state. He said he wanted to learn what the city has done to try to get those funds restored,
and if those funds are restored, what the city would do with them.
In addition, Miller asked for a discussion of a request for proposals for landscaping sent out by the city. In reading over the RFP, Miller said, he noticed it listed some tasks that the city currently doesn’t do. This would not make for a good apples-to-apples comparison
in deciding whether the city should privatize this service, he said.
Nicholls noted he and Councilman Phil Craft have been making presentations to PSPRS members. Miller asked if they could give the same presentation to the rest of the council. Nicholls agreed.
The council unanimously approved of the PSPRS and
HURF agenda items.
As for the landscaping RFP, City Attorney Richard Files noted that there may be some legal implications he needs to look at before scheduling the agenda item. Files asked for a week or less to research how the council can discuss it “in the most proper manner and in compliance with state law.”