Metro councilmembers are preparing to cut city department funding to deliver bigger salary increases for Metro employees — a key difference between the chamber’s budget and the operating budget proposed in May by Mayor Freddie O’Connell. Officials met on June 5 for the last of three work sessions led by Budget and Finance Committee Chair Delishia Porterfield, the at-large councilmember who is authoring the council’s alternative budget.
In her latest recap, @startleseasily reports on a tense back-and-forth between the Metro Council and finance director Kevin Crumbo
For almost three hours, members drained their beverages of choice — Dr. Pepper for Porterfield, iced tea and Diet Coke for colleagues — while discussing the city’s spare change. Porterfield’s task involves cobbling together the spending priorities of the 40-member council while making sure her proposed budget ends up legally compliant, functional and balanced. If the council doesn’t pass its own budget by July 1, O’Connell’s will go into effect by default. At the work session, members repeatedly referenced the previous night’s contentious and emotional public hearing, at which Metro employees spoke about poor pay and the need for salary increases to match Nashville’s skyrocketing cost of living.
Flat tax revenues haven’t given lawmakers the room to say yes to everyone. At the June 5 meeting, Porterfield brought out consensus among the room to prioritize employee raises even if it means cutting funding allocations to departments. Shifting funding from departments to cityside salary bumps would be a significant break from the budget proposed by O’Connell.
Budget officer Aaron Pratt, representing the Finance Department, began the meeting with a presentation methodically eliminating various pots of money that councilmembers thought they could access. Councilmembers’ spending “wish lists,’’ submitted earlier this month, included funding sources like the Barnes Housing Trust Fund, Metro’s Judgment and Losses Fund, and so-called contingency accounts that, Pratt said, can’t be touched for one reason or another. If members are ready to spend down all surplus in the city’s 4 percent fund — a legally required reserve — they have $4 million to work with.
In his first spending plan, O’Connell aims to ‘live within our means’ with $3.28 billion proposal
“Our job is to maintain that we’re structurally balanced and that we’re fiscally compliant,” Pratt told legislators. “The one only available source seems to be — well, is — residuals in the 4 percent. My job is to just provide guardrails.”
A full salary package would include an annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), a $20-per-hour floor for wage workers, step increases along Metro’s predetermined pay schedule and merit increases for qualifying employees. O’Connell’s budget came in with a 3.5 percent COLA, short of the Metro Civil Service Commission’s recommended 4 percent. During the public comment portion of the June 4 council meeting, Metro employees petitioned for 5 percent.
“I’m asking for you not to forget about us after today,” Jessica Curry, who works as support staff in Metro schools, told councilmembers that night. “The cost of living is at an all-time high. We need a 5 percent COLA to go with our piece of the pie.”
Each half-percent takes $7 million, Porterfield told colleagues the following day. She said arguing over which types of increases to fund, like COLA or merit, was a false choice.
“I would love to do both,” said Porterfield. “The question is, is it the will of the body to touch departments so that we can do both? I want us to pay all of our employees, and I want us to pay them well.”
As she recognized members to speak during the budget work session, no one wanted to advocate against raising employee pay. Testimony from Curry and dozens of other Metro workers seemed to have made a lasting impression. Over the course of the meeting, discussion shifted to cuts. Rather than continue to balance the budget on the backs of teachers and Metro employees, Porterfield said at one point, it was time to look at well-funded departments that may have more money than they need. She used the Metro Nashville Police Department and the Davidson County Sheriff’s Office as specific examples. Historically, both have enjoyed strong pull within the mayor’s office and faced little resistance to requests during budget season. One by one, members got behind Porterfield with fervor. They specifically favored clawing back funding from departments with positions that have remained unfilled.
Councilmembers submit requests to move money from reserve funds and law enforcement toward Metro Arts grants, employee raises
“I support trying to find the 5 percent COLA,” said District 16 Councilmember Ginny Welsch. “As you know, I have my scalpel in my bag for cutting any departments.”
“I think we should also expand the scope and not just look at unfilled positions,” said District 30 Councilmember Sandra Sepulveda, also appearing to set sights on MNPD. “Some of these departments just received new equipment, and they’re potentially asking for more new equipment when they were just funded some.”
“We can pillage health and other departments and figure out where we can get money from — I think that’s fair,” said Joy Styles of District 32. “We need to make sure our workers are taken care of.”
Tasha Ellis, Joy Kimbrough, Thom Druffel and Kyonzté Toombs (vice chair of the Budget and Finance Committee) also got behind department cuts in concept. The specifics come down to Porterfield. Councilmember At-Large Zulfat Suara, a CPA by day, put the situation in the clearest terms.
“I wish we had the money,” Suara said, smiling. “It would make it a whole lot easier. But I am open to looking at departments. I’ll leave the calculations to Finance, and Madam Budget Chair.”
Update, June 12: Porterfield officially filed her substitute budget on Wednesday. It includes a 4 percent COLA for Metro employees. Read more here.
