Deputies Association questions county’s tentative budget cuts

inmaricopa.com runs, on a regular basis, opinion pieces submitted by community members. The following article is the opinion of the author, and does not necessarily reflect the views of inmaricopa.com.

The Pinal County Deputies Association is concerned about the impending county budget. An across the board decrease in employee pay and terminations are in the works.

The question is: does Pinal County NEED to do this at this time? Major questions have been brought up that really need to be answered, especially in light of many of County Manager Terry Dolittle’s announcements. (see related article)

Inquiring minds want to know . . .

1. What happened to all the interest money that was accrued while all Pinal County employees were forced to take mandatory compensatory time instead of paid overtime? There has never been a clear accounting of the disposition of that interest money.

2. From where did the “slush fund” money come? This is the money County Manager Doolittle assured attendees, at the Board of Supervisors’ May 13 meeting, could be moved to cover the $5 million shortfall that resulted in the County asking all employees to take a 5 percent cut in pay along with no COLA and no step increases.

3. How much other “soft slush money” is lurking in the newly adopted tentative budget?

4. Explain why the County Manager and the Board of Supervisors failed to publish the tentative budget at least two weeks prior to the May 13 meeting. What happened to the Board of Supervisors’ promise of transparent and open meetings? Why did they attempt to sneak the tentative budget through without giving the citizens of Pinal County an opportunity to voice their concerns?

5. Explain why only the Sheriff and Judge Olson were allowed to speak during the discussion phase of the tentative budget presentation. Many others had signed up to be heard, and their requests were ignored.

6. Explain why the tentative budget was “railroaded” through without adequate discussion and review.

7. What happened to the money that was supposed to be returned to the county from the Stan Griffis adjudication? There has never been a clear accounting of the disposition of that money.

8. How much in pay cuts are County Manager Terry Doolittle and other upper level, appointed county employees going to take?

9. How much in pay cuts are the elected Board of Supervisors and others volunteering to take? Are they going to share the pain?

10. We learned in a letter from County Manager Terry Doolittle, published on May 14, that 50 people are going to be terminated to help balance the budget. How are the County Manager and the Board of Supervisors going to assure that the process of laying people off is fair and impartial, and not used to retaliate against any employee who is not part of the “Good Old Boy” system? Are they going to keep people with the most seniority? Are they going to force people into early retirement without giving them at least three months to enroll and finalize retirement programs?

11. The county has promised transparency in all of its dealings. While they proclaim the “glass is clear,” the contents remain murky. County Manager Doolittle, in his tentative budget presentation to the Board of Supervisors on May 13, bragged about the county’s accomplishments including lowering property taxes for fiscal year 2009-2010. After the presentation and before the Board of Supervisors voted to adopt the tentative budget, County Manager Doolittle told Sheriff Paul Babeu, Judge Carter Olson and the citizens attending the meeting that he had $12 million in the Master Facilities Plan fund that was, in essence, a slush fund that could be moved to cover the $5 million in purported shortfall that required the layoff of 50 employees and the mandatory 5 percent pay reduction for all county employees. He also told the attendees that the county had a $7 million dollar rainy day fund, which he didn’t want to use to keep employees from being laid off and/or forced to give up 5 percent of their pay. He mentioned another fund with more than $26 million that was held in reserve to keep the county’s “A” rating for borrowing purposes.

No copies of the tentative budget were made available to any other county department head, nor were any copies made available to the meeting attendees as is customary. With this in mind, please explain the county government’s definition of transparency.

12. Why are the Pinal County Board of Supervisors lowering property taxes when, supposedly, they don’t have enough money to run the county?

File photo