Councilman Bob Dyer: a local Bob McDonnell?
By Brian Kirwin | Sunday, April 25th, 2010 | PolicyCouncilman Bob Dyer penned this op-ed in today’s Virginian-Pilot (VP never puts these online). With his permission, we reprint it here.
Time to reform government — at all levels
AN ANGRY and frustrated public is demanding smaller, leaner and more transparent government. Given the challenges of an unstable and uncertain economy, now is the opportune time to reform the size and scope of government.
A recent Pew Research Poll indicated that 80 percent of the public has lost faith in the federal government, contending that government is too big and too powerful. These attitudes cascade down to state and local governments, necessitating a call to action at all levels.
Gov. Bob McDonnell is convening a Commission on Government Reform and Restructuring with the goal of a leaner, more efficient government. It would behoove cities like Virginia Beach to work with this commission and form their own task force to accomplish the same goals.
To have meaningful reform, the corporate culture — and the manner in which people perceive government — must change. It is likely that the actions in Washington and revenue woes in Richmond will have profound and lasting detrimental impacts on local budgets for the foreseeable future. We can no longer champion the status quo of doing business and expect to survive.
Immediately after passing the budget in May, the Virginia Beach City Council should convene a task force with the mission of improving city operations. The committee should be composed of the major stakeholders in the city: citizens, staff, elected officials and business community.
The current budget process is flawed. Cuts will dramatically impact service delivery. Many of our citizens are experiencing economic challenges and cannot bear the brunt of tax and fee increases. We will no doubt make it through this budget cycle, but unless we change the way we do business, future services and programs will be at risk.
The public expects government to deal with the pain the same way citizens do: by reducing its size and scope while continuing to provide essential services. This can be accomplished by re-evaluating and reorganizing our business methods.
Given that we are a part-time council with full-time accountabilities and responsibilities, year-round interaction is essential to the process. Better oversight, clear direction and ongoing reprioritization are essential.
Reform would involve a department-bydepartment review and analysis. Rather than cut essential positions, like police and fire, we should determine what positions are necessary to provide the services people want — and also what positions and services are redundant or obsolete.
Inevitably a work force reduction will be necessary to achieve long-term sustainability. This can be accomplished by retirement and attrition combined with smarter work processes, consolidation and crosstraining.
Reform should also look at what the function of government should be. Should we be in the golf course business? When will we have acquired enough open space? Should we rely on the private sector for real estate development? What do we currently do that can be eliminated? How do we protect and promote our small businesses? How can government be more user-friendly?
Our future is changing due to a turbulent and uncertain economy. The public must change its expectations of government as resources continue to diminish. Leaders must find innovative ways to deliver services at reduced costs.
The people and their government must work collaboratively to get through this. We must embrace government reform and change rather than fight it. At this time there is no definite plan or path, but all stakeholders coming to the realization that government reform is in everyone’s best interest is a good start.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
30 Responses to "Councilman Bob Dyer: a local Bob McDonnell?"
City Council should have already been doing all those things – THAT is the problem.
And City Council members will correctly be removed from office for their failures to do so. “After” the bloated Budget is passed? Are you serious?
As far as “Immediately after passing the budget in May” – um, Bobby, that is waaaaaaaay too late! Y’all should have done your work to reduce spending and to better prioritize debt and spending B-E-F-O-R-E “passing the budget”. Good grief!
Bobby has known for a L-O-N-G time about the need to lead his fellow City Council members to follow his lead and restore the city’s spending back to the basic services our city is required to provide, and .., the need to put the non-required “wants” on the referendum ballot and let the taxpayers decide if they want to pay more for nice-to-haves.
Folks, here is but 1 example I gleaned from reading the City’s 5 year forcast report and the nifty little 8-part fold up “FY 2010-11 Proposed Resource Management Plan”:
Add up the proposed Operating Budget and Captial Budget for Economic Developement and Convention & Visitor Developmwent (Tourism) and we discover that the “budget” plans to SPEND $41M this coming year!! $41 Million? Are they kidding me?
Hey, now THERE is a great place to begin reducing spending and debt and setting appropriate priorities.
Economic Development and the CVD departments are BOTH “economic development” – combine the two departments and get rid of redundant management – have ONE head of Economic Development decide where best to invest his/her budget to yield the best return on investment. “Tourism”, when you actually study the cash flow it generates into the city coffers, is NOT the wisest strategy moving forward. But, when you create a department whose only focus is “Tourism” (CVD), are they really going to recommend defunding their department in favor of other economic development activities that would yield a better return on investment to Beach taxpayers?
The time to correct Jim Spores bloated budget is B-E-F-O-R-E passing Jim Spore’s spending and debt plan that we simply cannot afford.
Congratulations, Reid. It only took you 10 years to come up with a budget idea.
Sounds like Bob Dyer wants to be the City Manager. If so, he should apply for the job. In the meantime, please act on our behalf as a member of the Council, and have an open mind to what we want, not what you think we should have.
Point is, by responding to the group of less than 20 members of the VBTA, Bob puts himself at variance with most of the citizens of the Beach who are neither members of the VBTA, nor supporters of the tea party. Fact is, sure, we want the lowest tax rate possible, but we don’t want our programs and services gutted either.
The Manager cut $80,300,000 from this year’s budget, and cut over 200 positions, cuts which will affect all areas of service delivery. But the Manager listened to citizens and members of the Council in creating the budget, and frankly, from where I sit, he did a good balancing job.
Dyer sounds like the old and discredited leadership of the VBTA that got less than 16% of the vote in the last election. To me, Dyer ought to be listening to the great majority of us who value our low tax rate and our outstanding schools, public safety, human services, and parks and recreation.
To witness the VBTA members snicker and laugh at those at the hearing who had special needs, and testified that the services the City provided “kept them alive” was sickening. Dyer ought to listen to the rest of us before he is discredited by his association with these extremists.
So, Mike, you and Reid Greenmun(VBTA Transportion chair) both criticize Councilman Bobby Dyer, huh? It is good to see you and the VBTA agree that Dyer isn’t doing enough of what he should.
Oh sure, one side doesn’t think he went far enough in action (he has made a few good votes lately though) and the other just doesn’t like the new rhetoric, but you both agree that Dyer is less than outstanding. You and Reid should build on having that in common and go out for coffee or…..a cup of tea.
What is more sickening, Mike? Some VBTA guys rolling their eyes at how the manager and council frame the question, or the fact that council/management will put up new taxes for additional fire department needs, a rec center, and a multimillion dollar animal shelter? I wasn’t at that meeting you speak of, but I know all about that last tax package Sessoms/Spore brought up previously and it fits their historical pattern. The city likes to find people to take hostage and blackmail the contituents into supporting fiscal policy contrary to their interests.
Either YOU NEED additional fire resources or you don’t. YOU DON’T PUT THAT IN A VOLUNTARY, HAVE THE CITIZENS DECIDE BUDGET amendment!!!!!!! The rec center and the animal shelter, yes. However, being responsible isn’t their objective. The objective of Spore and his shrooms on council is to force people to vote their way or being stuck voting against firemen, children, and little kitties and puppies. THAT is what is truly sickening!!
Well, of course for me, it is clear that the antics of the VBTA to condemn, to laugh at, to snicker and offer derision to those who exercise their right of free speech to support the city manager’s proposed budget, is clearly the most deplorable.
Given the fact that John Moss, their chairman, ran for City Council yet received less than 16% of the vote, it is quite clear that these old men do not listen to the needs expressed by the majority of our citizens, yet they show up and disrupt any public hearing, believing that by increasing the volume of their comments, it makes them more relevant.
Fact is, they, and Councilman Dyer, are listening to a very small minority. The voters showed that to the VBTA last election; I am surprised that Mr. Dyer seems to have forgotten the effect of less than 16% of the vote. He may want to return to the service level of a rural county, but most of us don’t want that at all.
Yawn – Virignia Beach Visions, Developer, and Democratic Party operative Barrett attacks the VBTA and defends his good pal and vacatgion buddy, Jim Spore. Anyone surprised? But getting back to the topic at hand, Councilman Dyer’s proposal for doing all the things that should have been done B-E-F-O-R-E passing this huge budget – enough already. How many years has Bob Dyer had on City Council to take change of the budgeting process? This is another attempt to stave off accountability of the City Council for their failure to direct Jim Spore to do a better job preparing a budget the citizens of Virginia Beach can afford.
Mike Barrett showed up late the last Budget hearing AFTER the VBTA had made their remarks. He regurgitated the same old lies and talking points about how blowing hundreds of millions of our tax dollars on Corporate Welfare for Mike and his friends is keeping our taxes so low – oh, excuse me, out tax RATE so low.
Do ya all know what? If the City Council had not voted to raise the tax rate each year since 2000, the current tax rate would be $0.52 cents per $100.00 of assessed value, not the current $0.89 cents – or the Jim Spore Barrett “plan” $0.93 cents.
Folks, the “budget” now contains $102.2M in debt service – and the Barrett/Spore plan is toi increase the annual debt service by adding another $4.3M – to a new total of $106.5M.
You see folks, all those bigh ticket Corporate Welfare “investments” are bleeding Beach taxpayers dry. And the time was long before “after Bob votes to approve the budget” to deal with this. Further, the VBTA has come before City Council year after year after year to inform Council of this mess.
Council failed to listen and the result is the train wreck our city now faces.
First of all, it’s great that Reid finally admits that CVD is in the economic development business. For at least 11 years now he’s been telling us it’s part of a massive conspiracy. He’s oppossed every Resort Area project except the seawall.
As for his idea to merge DED and CVD:
1. Even if you merged them, very few redundancies. You’d save a couple top administrators and a few secretaries and receptionists.
2. CVD has operational functions that DED doesn’t. Therefore, DED administrators wouldn’t have expierience at it.
There are departmental mergers that make more sense than that: Fire/EMS, Health/HNP/Human Services, etc.
At least Reid admits what his primary aim is: not taxpayers savings, but rather his longtime crackpipe dream of gutting CVD’s budget to send the cash to DED. If you think that can actually happen, I have some Al Wallace political futures to sell you.
This gets to part of why Greenmun has zero credibility: he wants us to throw away every natural advantage we have to pursue what every town in America can. He opposes Resort and port funding. His VBTA wanted to flush Oceana NAS out of here in 2005. Not only would we have infinitely more competition going that route, but we couldn’t execute it as Reid would choke off the transportation network necessary to do so.
What a shame that Greenmun, one of the brain trust that helped John Moss get less than 16% of the vote in the last Mayor’s election, offers up many of the same proposals that were part of that campaign. Warmed over, worn out ideas that have been rejected by the electorate. Actually mostly zany ideas that if implemented would actually result in much higher costs, hence higher real estate taxes for homeowners. But don’t take my word for it; just look at the results of the last election for Mayor; Greenmun and the brain trust helped Moss to put forth the same zany ideas they are putting forth today; fact is, the voters are much smarter than that. Give it up, Reid, let new leadership replace the failed policies of the VBTA. You would be voted out, but there are hardly any members left to vote!
Mike says Spore “cut over 200 positions, cuts which will affect all areas of service delivery”
Positions. Not people. 100 of those jobs no one has. No one. We aren’t paying a plumb nickel for them. The other 100 are so redundant that the people will all be moved to other jobs in government.
So the end result of cutting these 200 positions is we don’t spend a penny less than we did before.
Some cut!
I like Bob Dyer but frankly, his/this “plan” should have been completed before a budget vote is taken in May. It isn’t going to happen. This is just the same old spin that gets put on every election and budget cycle. I’ve seen this several years in a row but nothing really ever changes. And Greenmun had his chance to cut the budget a few years ago, so he has zero value in this process IMO. And Mike Barrett is simply trying to get more public dollars for his construction projects so his input is tanted as well. Frankly worthless comments from both of them are not worth a response…
I find it interesting that your Republicans are the ones on city council and spending billions. Yet you all blame the Dems and praise the Repubs. Just more political games… Spin on!
Brian,
Not exactly. While those positions may be unfilled, the money was in the Budget to pay the employee compensation should they have been filled. Therefore, you eliminate that expense from the budget.
William,
For those who miss your reference, Reid Greenmun told City Council that he could cut $55 million from the Budget at an April 20, 2004 Public Hearing in the Council Chambers. Of course, Reid never delivered the budget report he promised Council live on VBTV. (VBTV may still have the tape of it.)
Mike,
When it comes to the VBTA, don’t you mean lack of brains trust?
Speaking of CVD, who at Runnymede picked out the carpet in the Board Room? After it was remodeled, inevitably the first comment of anyone walking in was about that awful-looking burnt orange carpet. Visiting your son in Houston, did you spend too much time looking at UT Longhorns paraphenalia?
For Reid’s benefit, I’m told the remodeling came at no cost to the taxpayer. It was suppose to be part of “build out money”….
Henry, not spending money you haven’t spent doesn’t mean you’ve spent less.
Brian,
Yes, but in taking the positions off the books you have less authorized spending.
…that just gets rerouted to more spending. Be honest, Henry.
Not necessarily. In this case, it certainly isn’t.
I did wonder why Virginia Beach was in the golf course business. The debt concerns me as well. I would have thought that more of that debt would have been retired during the years with the substantial rise in real estate tax revenue.
Its also time to consider local government pension reform. Have the city employees contribute to their own retirement plans structured the same way as many private sector retirement plans. This would give the city employees more flexibility when considering a transition to the private sector.
Yes, that is absolutely the case. At Vision, we have called attention to the “ticking time bomb” represented by employee benefits that are simply not sustainable in the future. The Governor did not make the VRS contribution this year, giving a $750,000,000 IOU to VRS, and he refused to support the change that would have allowed localities the option of requiring employees to make the 5% match instead of having the city pay that. Of course, William Bailey thanked the Governor for his action, yet in the long term, now that wages and salaries of public employees often exceed those in the private sector, it is time for a defined contribution plan, not a defined benefit plan which is part of the cause of the bankruptcy of so many U.S. companies. Most of us in the private sector long ago converted to defined contributions; it is time for the public sector to do the same. MJB sends!
It might surprise Mr. Barrett to kjnow that the VBTA has been pointing out the same issue regarding the VRS for the past 4 years. On this point Visions and the VBTA agree. Probably why the Union/City Employee advocate Mr. Bailey hopes to encourage others to dismiss both Mike and I as having useful input to the discussion.
Yes, Vision and the VBTA rarely agree on issues, but we do agree that the current policy of defined benefits is simply unsustainable. Regretfully, the Governor has apparently bowed to political pressure instead of listening to business savy citizens who understand the change in the fiscal environment. One has only to refer to formerly great corporations brought down in part by promises they could not keep. Better to institute reform before a crisis occurs, although if the Governor’s failure to fund the state’s share this year is not a wake up call, no one in this administration is listening. The Legislature gave him the chance to act responsibly, but he demurred. A short term political decision with severe long term consequences.
Oh my…I have created unity among combatants! Like peas in a pod on a Red Herring…
Boys: let’s look at the bigger crisis: We need to get all those deadbeat military and federal civil servants employees and retirees funding 5% into their own retirement pool! These retirement benefits are going to ruin America. Those freeloaders don’t pay a dime into their own retirements!!! That retirement system benefit isn’t sustainable!!! Oh what a crisis!!!!! What are we going to do? How can we get them to pay: I ask VB Vision and the VBTA? What are we going to do? Oh the inhumanity of it all… It is unsustainable!!!! We have to put a stop to this nightmare…
I don’t remember hearing either one of you boys or your organizations pushing those issues…
Mike wants to take the funds from the taxpayers and city/school employees and spend it on his development public/private partnership plans while Reid wants to get back at local employees. It’s shameful on both of your parts…
So you boys can take yourself serving agendas and desires and sell them to somebody who doesn’t see through them. As I wrote before: your input is tainted and not worth a dime. I’m not buying it and neither did Gov. Bob McD.
Actually William, you have done no so such thing. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the unfunded liabilities of benefit programs run amok are the cause of potential bankruptcy in the future just as they have caused in the past. We are not suggesting that benefits not be provided, just that the employee contribute to their retirement benefits just like those in the private sector. While at one time, it could be said that public employees are not adequately compensated, that is not the case today, and some experts have suggested that compensation plus benefits in the pubic sector are at least 20% higher than the private sector for most positions. So we recommended that new employees pay the 5% match, and legacy employees gradually do so as well. Nothing revolutionary about that at all. MJB sends!
William, why would the VBTA or Virginia Beach Visions raise a matter of Federal worker compensation with our local City Council and their budget, which is what THIS topic is about? That makes no sense what so ever – talk about YOUR Red Herrings, William, LOL!
I would expect nothing less from Vision’s closet government: Take from the taxpayers and employees and give to the rich. You are correct. Nothing revolutionary about that at all.
And you do not really mean the “public sector.” You only mean the “local city/schools” public sector… You choose to ignore the major benefits funding issue to instead focus on only the part of the problem that allows you to gain additional construction funding on the backs of local school teacher, police officers and firefighter amoung others.
I could see the need to address the issue if you were not so insincere in your approach to the benefits funding vs. your personal and VB Vision’s gain in development funds.
Reid: You had the chance to save the taxpayers 55 million but you dropped the ball… The City Council offered you staffing to assist you with your cuts but you dropped the ball…
Why would you do anything except drop the ball in this budget discussion? History repeats itself over and over…
Position one’s self as a “government reformer.” The campaign for higher office has been unleashed, I see…
William, gotta love the personal attacks instead of discussing the topic.
Well William, I guess we can forget about a rational dialogue on this topic. You may think lashing out at the business community is the best way to garner long term support for employees of local government, but I think you are completely wrong. Yes, we have been strong advocates for the role of local government employees, especially when others have been most critical, and we continue to be strong advocates today, but the situation with defined employee benefits, regardless of cost, is simply out of control. You laud the Governor for his irresponsible action to issue a $750,000,000 IOU to VRS,and to prevent the employees from contributing to their retirement plan, yet you must know that this is bad in the long term for the viability of VRS. The Legislature sees the effect of unfunded liabilities; why can’t you? Private business has made this switch in order to remain competitive, and your intransigence may cause more contracting out for employees, less FTEs, which last time I checked, would not be a positive development for those you represent. Is that want you want? MJB sends!
Mike: I do not represent anyone… And if Private business has made the change, I must have missed it. The only change I see coming through clearly is your corporate profit margin has increased and the business owners get richer as they cut the benefits of the very employees who create/produce the successful bussiness. And then we have the business owners taking handouts and bail outs from the national, state and local taxpayers to support their own incomes. I don’t see who you can call corporate welfare making the change.
And Reid: I noticed you failed to show up to speak at the city council budget hearing on Tuesday night when they called your name… More dropping the ball… A Personal attack? No just reporting the facts…
William, you are simply in a state of denial. I do not know of a private corporation today that provides a defined benefit plan like VRS. Corporations simply cannot afford that long term, undefined liability. Instead, most contrinbute to an employee’s 401k that is portable and transferable. Frankly, I think both are better off. You know that as well, and I take your intrasigence as a tactic which in the long run, in my opinion, does not serve public employees very well. MJB sends!
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.