Several cost-saving measures implemented last year by the city of Chattanooga have left few choices for trimming this year, the city’s chief financial officer said Tuesday.
“I don’t see them (departments) really being able to cut a whole lot,” Daisy Madison said.
City officials said this week the city possibly could look at raising property taxes for the first time since a 48-cent increase per $100 of assessed value in 2001. Other measures the city could look at would be cost-saving measures, Ms. Madison said.
But she said it still is too early to get the exact specifics on what kind of steps the city could take. Department heads will begin submitting their budgets to the finance department Monday, she said.
Ms. Madison said they have been asked to present three scenarios — what they could do with a full level of money, what they could do with the current budget dollars and what they would have to do if there was a reduction in revenue.
The city implemented cost-saving measures last year, including reduction of staff through attrition and stopping travel for city employees. Those kinds of steps make it tough to implement more cuts this coming fiscal year, she said.
Ms. Madison said one example is that the city chose to reduce staff through attrition rather than doing employee furloughs. If the city tried doing furloughs now, there may not be enough staff to deliver city services, she said.
Mayor Ron Littlefield on Tuesday left open the possibility of furloughs, but he also noted it would be difficult to implement them due to attrition. He said the city plans to continue looking for federal money. He also did not have any specifics, but he said the possibility of one contentious issue last year could come back to the table.
The city looked at requiring employees to pay for take-home cars, and the mayor said that could come up again.
But he said there would be options.
“We’ll present the council with more than one choice,” he said. “There’s always the choice of cutting further.”
Mr. Littlefield also said he did not think the city’s financial woes would affect the idea of consolidation of city and county government. He said that in the long run he thought it would help cement the idea.
“One of the affects of consolidation is efficiency, and efficiency is saving money,” he said.
Bill Reesor, spokesman for Hamilton County Residents Against Annexation, said he does not see the mayor’s views in the same light. He said the recent annexation attempts by the city showed from the beginning that the city is in financial trouble and the city’s “land grab” was just an attempt to help boost depleted funds.
“They’re broke,” he said. “If they can’t afford the services, where are they going to get the money?”
Council Chairman Jack Benson said Tuesday that if the council was presented with a budget that either asked for a reduction in services or an increase in taxes, he did not know which direction the panel would turn.
“We will have to look at what services we can cut and see if it gets to where it’s not practical,” he said.