Calling for a 3% across-the-board cut is a rather simplistic solution and one that many Duval voters may mistakenly believe is quite easy to accomplish.  It's not.  City of Jacksonville employees, from Police and Fire to regular city employees, are overwhelmingly unionized.  Any across-the-board cuts are something that have to be negotiated with the unions.  It's a lengthy process and one that---as we have pointed out on JaxPoliticsOnline.com time and time again---is anything but guaranteed.

John Rutherford has stated quite clearly that the $10 million cut ordered by the Council, when paired with the $9 million cut the Mayor ordered in his original budget proposal, will have an impact on police services.  And, it's hard to imagine how it couldn't.  Rutherford doesn't have the option of ordering an across-the-board salary reduction to his existing workforce to achieve the savings.  Sure, he can hope for the best with union negotiations, but it's unrealistic to expect that the City will get exactly what it wants.  And, by the time those negotiations are complete, any "savings" achieved might be too late in the year to have any significant impact in this year's budget.

He will outline his plans today, but one thing is for certain.  Council members could face political consequences for any decision made that results in fewer police services and fewer cops on the street.  If a spike in crime follows any cut, expect the voters of Duval County to react rather angrily in 2011.

Weeks after City Council President Richard Clark expressed his commitment to identifying nearly $50 million in savings, he unveiled a step in his plan to achieve those savings---eliminating many of the city's volunteer boards and commissions.  While it is unclear how eliminating volunteer boards will help eliminate a $50 million deficit, Clark's proposal is wide-reaching and could have drastic implications for the future of Jacksonville.  Among the boards and commissions Clark would like to see chopped are:

• TRUE Commission
• Environmental Advisory Board
• Historic Preservation Committee
• Human Rights Commission
• Council on Elderly Affairs
• Cultural Services Grant Committee
• Cultural Council
• Jacksonville Economic Development Commission (JEDC)

While I have advocated on more than one occasion that the city take a look at the volume of Commissions and Boards it has to determine if all are still necessary, I do find it rather shocking that a Council President would propose the nearly complete elimination of any method of volunteer public involvement.

Pardon me, but it's not adding up.

To the Finance Committee's credit, Clark's proposal was tabled and will be considered at the August 27 meeting.  Reaction around the city seems to indicate confusion as to how the elimination of volunteer boards and commissions will help the city achieve any significant costs savings.

One of the speaker's at today's Finance Committee meeting was less than laudatory.  Sheriff John Rutherford accused the Council, in effect, of choosing political gain by raiding the city's pension reserve funds during the good years and choosing to blame the City's Police and Fireman for a financial situation for which they are not responsible.  The Sheriff has made it clear that he will not support pay cuts for city employees, particularly for the Sheriff Department where Duval lags behind the rest of the state in pay for officers, despite the fact that we lead the state in murders.

Despite all of the talk of paycuts, the Committee made no moves to cut their own salaries, nor did Richard Clark offer to cut the additional $15,000 a year he makes as Council President.  The Committee also failed to take any action to reduce the budget of the City Council by eliminating benefits and reducing the number of aides.

So far, these solutions aren't cutting it.  Let's talk when we hear some serious proposals.

Now that we have celebrated the 40th anniversary of Consolidation, we should perhaps acknowledge that it's time to take a another look at the efficiency of our consolidated government.  The Charter Commission, a once-a-decade group appointed to consider changes to the city's charter, is currently looking at suggestions for improving the form of government that Jacksonville/Duval County pioneered to the rest of the country in 1968.

One of the suggestions that has been made includes re-examining the role of the General Counsel's Office in regards to any potential conflict of interest that might arise between representing the Mayor's Office and the City Council (as well as the other Constitutional Officers).  Another suggestion that has been made is the adoption of staggered terms for City Council members.  The ideas are numerous, and many sound quite reasonable, but there are a few that have yet to be mentioned that should also receive attention.

First of all, why does a consolidated government need 19 elected City Council members?  (This, of course, on top of the five constitutional officers that are also elected.)  Do 19 representatives for a population of 850,000+ suggest an efficient consolidated government?  Orlando has 6 City Commissioners, which when combined with the 6 County Commissioners equals a total of 12 representatives---for a population nearly 200,000 larger than Jacksonville.  Tampa and Hillsborough County are similar.  Their City Council, when combined with the County Commission, equals 14 representatives---for a population of 1.2 million.  Even Miami and Miami-Dade have 1 less combined City Council/County Commissioner than Jacksonville---for a population 3 times as large.  With a proposed City Council budget of $9.5 million, perhaps it's time to re-visit the need for 5 at-large seats and explore reducing the number of council districts.

One of the suggestions that has been floating around for the Charter Review Commission is a look at whether or not the Sheriff should be an appointed position.  This would, in my opinion, be a bad move.  Duval County has benefited from a Sheriff who is directly accountable to the public.  It's hard to imagine an appointed Sheriff willing to take the Mayor's Office and the City Council to task over the budget like John Rutherford has.  While the Sheriff's Office should be forced to justify expenditures just like any other city department, it's hard not to admire a man willing to put his political capital on the line to do what he feels is in the city's best interest.  Appointing future Sheriff's would likely lead to "Yes Men (or Women)" who were unwilling to challenge the Mayor who appointed them, even when they felt it was in the best interest of their department.

On the other hand, the City and the Tax Collector have been at war for several years over who is responsible for doing what functions and, many counties have already moved to consolidate the functions of the Tax Collector within county government.  Perhaps Jacksonville should explore that option.

Another suggestion that has been floated has been the possibility of an appointed school board filled with volunteers.  This idea, which the Times-Union touted in a June 7 Editorial, is intriguing.  The plan would be modeled after the university board of regents model where appointees---often distinguished community leaders---serve without a salary.  As it is, the Mayor and the City Council are often incorrectly viewed by voters as being responsible for the City's education system, this type of system would place the responsibility for high-quality appointees at their feet.

One final suggestion to explore would be a review of the city's independent authorities.  With the tremendous growth at the JaxPort and the consistently-high profit margins maintained by JAA, wouldn't it be nice if JEA wasn't the only independent agency that made an annual contribution to the city's revenues?

The Jacksonville City Council's Finance Committee moved to close the city's $50 million deficit on Thursday by proposing a 3% across the board cut for every city department.  This cut, according to The Times-Union, would come on top of the 5% cut already ordered by Mayor John Peyton.  Of course, with the general fund accounts for most departments having already been drained over the past few years, this means that there will likely be few places for the cuts to come from.  The most likely source?  City employee salaries.

The salaries of city employees are a rather tricky matter.  While the Council may have ordered 3% cuts (which, when combined with the Mayor's proposed cuts will equal 8%), they have no authority to force salary cuts for union employees.  For any cuts in the salaries of city union employees, the Council---like the Mayor---is completely dependent on future negotiations with the unions.  Because union employees comprise a significant portion of city employees, it is entirely likely that the brunt of department cuts will be born by rather small percentage of individuals.

Sheriff John Rutherford isn't buying the Council's "solution."  A long-time employee of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office, Rutherford is understandably sympathetic towards city employees.  “[T]hey want to take it out of the employees’ pockets,” he said. “It is wrong.”

Non-union civil service employees should not be unfairly punished for the city's financial problems.  They didn't create them and they should not be forced to bear the brunt of any attempts to right them.

However, news this week that the Sheriff was behind efforts to institute changes to Florida law that will further complicate investigations seems to have sparked a backlash.  The new legislation pushed by Jacksonville's Sheriff will allow cops to see all the evidence against them before they are interviewed in any investigation.  Police officers will now have a benefit that no private citizens has---the opportunity to speak with fellow officers and review any evidence against them to determine how a story should be relayed to investigators.  These changes could have sweeping consequences---for example, the Tampa officers who were fired after failing to put in a full work week had no idea that they were under GPS surveillance.  Had they known, they would have likely (by their own admission) relayed an entirely different story than the one that they did share with investigators.  

Imagine how this legislation will impact any investigations of police shootings?  Or, of incidents such as the one on Merrill Road where a JSO Officer is suspected of negligence in a crash that killed an innocent 86-year old man.

Up to this point, local ministers and activists have been willing to take the Sheriff at his word that he was working towards greater transparency, but news that he was one of the main authors of this troublesome legislation seems to raise doubts about his commitment.  Whether he will face political repercussions for his support of such controversial legislation remains to be seen.

Sheriff John Rutherford, a close friend of Hires's, went to the home on Old Plank Road and said there is no initial indication that foul play is involved. Rutherford said gun cleaning supplies were discovered at the scene and there is some indication Hires may have been cleaning a gun at the time of his death. Rutherford said police are still searching for a cause and an autopsy will be done.

I have known Mr. Hires for years.  My thoughts are with his family.

Other local blogs are covering the story.

In Duval County, the Sheriff's Department blatantly violated the law by requiring the individual who requested the public records to complete a form giving their name, address, phone number, etc...