No city budget that requires police department layoffs will pass, City Council members insist.
"That's a nonstarter," said Councilman Peter Murphy. "That's absolutely out of the question."
Councilman Russell Gilbert agreed.
"I don't think my colleagues would let that happen," he said.
Instead, cuts to "nonessential" departments should be considered to balance the 2010-11 budget, Councilwoman Pam Ladd said.
Some areas that might be looked at for deeper cuts include the Department of Education, Arts & Culture, Parks and Recreation and perhaps the 311 Center, Ms. Ladd said.
"Quite honestly, I wanted to see some of those cuts to nonessential services last year," she said.
City Council members have three budget plans to review: One proposes to increase spending by $25 million, one maintains spending at current levels and one cuts spending by 5 percent.
A 5 percent spending reduction would force the layoffs of at least 109 employees, 85 of them sworn police officers, budget documents show. Keeping spending levels the same as last year's budget would result in 51 layoffs, 49 of them sworn officers.
But council members are adamant that neither scenario is realistic.
"Whatever we do, it's going to have to be for the essentials," Council Chairman Jack Benson said. "Police is essential, fire is essential and public works is essential."
Mayor Ron Littlefield has suggested a possible property tax increase to pay for more money for police, fire and other services. The City Council last passed a property tax increase in September 2001. The current rate is $2.20 per $100 of assessed value.
He said last week that his budget, which comes out next month, could be close to the "fully implemented" $197 million budget. This year's budget is about $172 million.
Mrs. Ladd said the final budget figures might end up somewhere between $172 million and $197 million.
The council could have to look at cuts in some places and a smaller property tax increase to pay for essential services such as police, fire and public works.
"We may have a mixed bag," she said.
Mr. Benson said a small property tax increase this year might be reasonable, followed by smaller tax increases in the future. The council would be unlikely to pass a large tax increase this year, he said.
Councilwoman Deborah Scott said she doesn't think it's practical for the council to slash spending across the board on all departments. The realistic way to look at the bigger picture is to go department by department, she said.
BY THE NUMBERS* $197 million: Budget that meets all department requests* $172 million: Budget that keeps spending at current levels* $167 million: Budget that cuts spending 5 percent from this year's levelsSource: Chattanooga
She said safety is her No. 1 concern, with roads and infrastructure second.
"We may have to look at increasing funding to some departments and decreasing other departments," she said.
She said she's not completely sold on a property tax increase.
"I'm sold on reprioritizing how we spend money," she said.
Follow Cliff Hightower on Twitter at twitter.com/cliffhigh tower.
Continue reading by following these links to related stories:
Article: Chattanooga: Budget cut would mean layoffs
Article: Cleveland: Facing budget challenge
Article: Electric linemen get raises in Dayton
Article: Communities face shortage of funds to commemorate Civil War