A Threefold 'Thank You' to Los Angeles
Dear Los Angeles: I'm Thankful For...
-thumb-110x110-213475.jpg)
A Photo Gallery of the Things I am Grateful for This Year
I LOVE L.A.! My Thanksgiving Thanks
10 Random Albums To Be Thankful For
In light of ongoing news about the city's budget crisis (a predicted $295 million dollar deficit), information about the number of people employed by the city who earn more than $100,000 is not sitting well with some.
As reported in the Daily News, the newspaper conducted research and compiled a "review of salary data [that] shows more than 21,000 city workers take home $70,000 or more a year and more than 6,000 take home more than $100,000." Some individual salaries will see increases in the coming months, bringing "city workers' average salaries [to] about $68,850 for civilians and $93,800 for sworn police and fire by July - placing them in the upper ranks of comparable cities and far higher than private-sector workers."
The Daily News obtained the data by accessing a database via the City Controller's office which is available through the California Public Records Act. In fact, the City Controller herself, Laura Chick, has observed some instances of spending at the city level that are deals indicative of "a fatal flaw in city spending patterns."
Some City employees have come forward with observations about the salaries, including "Deputy Mayor Robert 'Bud' Ovrom - who took a nearly $100,000 pay cut to move from head of the Community Redevelopment Agency to oversee economic development for the mayor at an annual salary of $138,622" who noted that "top city managers in some cases could make more in the private sector" but that "entry- and mid-level workers make more money with government jobs because they get regular cost-of-living and 'step' - or promotional - increases." Ovrom added the following, addressing some of the questionable applications of $100k salaries: "I had a dozen (employees) making over $100,000 in the CRA, and I didn't know what they did."
In defense of City employees, union leaders claim that the budget crisis cannot be attributed to salaries. Some suggest pay cuts as a solution, while the reality of program funding cuts are becoming undeniable. In addition, increased taxes may be one option the City has to counteract the deficit.
TOP TIERMore than 6,000 city workers earn $100,000 or more a year in base pay, excluding overtime. Here's a look at the departments where they work:
2,600 -- Police
1,176 -- Fire
485 -- City attorneys
229 -- Airport employees
214 -- Bureau of Engineering
178 -- Information Tech. Agency
161 -- Harbor employees
158 -- Bureau of Sanitation
93 -- Transportation
69 -- General Services
63 -- Personnel
60 -- Housing Department
56 -- City Administrative Office
36 -- City Council
34 -- Recreation and Parks
33 -- Community Development
32 -- Controller
30 -- Planning
25 -- City Clerk
24 -- Mayor
20 -- Board of Public Works
19 -- Library
17 -- Fire and Police Pension
16 -- Bureau of Street Lighting
13 -- Office of Finance
13 -- City Employees' Retirement System
10 -- L.A. Convention Center
10 -- Environmental Affairs
10 -- Office of Treasurer
Photo by Refracted Moments™ via Flickr
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
While I'm sure it's true that some of these folks are making more than their job is really worth, shouldn't we also consider the fact that LA has one of the highest costs-of-living in the country? I'm wondering what those "comparable cities" are because we all know that unless you've got $1M+ to spend on a house, you're stuck living in the boonies.
The lesson to be learned here is not:
"hey, why do these city employees make 'so much' money?!"
But rather that we should be doing everything we can to ensure all workers have they ability to organize.
Collective bargaining is essential in garnering automatic cost-of-living wage increases and other fair wage practices.
The real issue is that most workers are underpaid - that the average American earns less and less every year.
Whether many city workers actually make the effort to earn the pay they're getting is another issue altogether, and as far as I'm concerned, the 2nd elephant in the room (after the LAPD's lack of fiscal discipline) when it comes to the City of LA's budget.
There's no real issue here, it's a punch line!
6,000 people making over 100K and this is how they maintain the city?
And they expect ME to cough up $1500 to fix the sidewalk in front of my house? If that's not comedy, what is?
Hey, let's just vote ourselves another raise and keep ignoring public opinion.
Living in LA is extremely expensive - much more expensive than most other places.
Keeping LA running is extremely challenging - much more difficult than most other places.
And American workers are, on average, miserably underpaid - and far too often, they have crappy benefits to boot.
Personally, I find it encouraging that there are so many well-paid opportunities for people who are willing to devote their careers to keeping Los Angeles humming, even though they're frequently hamstrung in their efforts by the constant complaints about "high taxes" emanating from barstool blowhards who have no clue just how low the typical American's tax burden really is, compared to much of the rest of the civilized world.
The people who whine loudest about our lack of free universal medical care and bazillion-dollar 24/7 state-of-the-art transit systems are usually the same ones who think that $4.00/gal. gasoline is outrageous and intolerable.
If you want superior public services, then you should support higher taxes - and not just higher taxes on other people.
If you want lower taxes, then you should refrain from complaining about inadequate public services.
You get what you pay for - there ain't no free lunch.
If you just have to complain, then at least pick one side or the other - lower taxes or better services - and quit pining away for some imaginary neverland where you get all the cool stuff you want without having to pay what it costs.
I don't think I'm getting what I pay for, and I don't mind paying high taxes for services. That's the problem here. The corporate culture of the City of LA's various departments is not working, and just because we're obviously willing to pay the kind of wages that attract quality workers doesn't mean that we're actually getting quality work out of the workers we have.
LAMapNerd writes: "If you just have to complain, then at least pick one side or the other - lower taxes or better services - and quit pining away for some imaginary neverland where you get all the cool stuff you want without having to pay what it costs."
Sorry, but your false dichotomy doesn't fly.
How about "responsibly spent taxes" and "efficiently managed services" as a choice. Surely you're not implying that taxpayers can't have both?
Eliminating overtime would near balance the budget yet defenders claim that the police need the overtime to address staffing shortages and that it's cheaper than the alternative.
Meanwhile the Police Department leads the City in the voluntary furlough program. Hmmm...
"Irresponsibly spent taxes" and "inefficiently managed services" are the status quo. Yes, I think we should address both.
That's an excellent point. People for some reason believe that their choices are just "pay up or shut up". How about putting the money that you do get where it is needed most? Its Los Angeles people! Do you know the amount of money that is generated in this city from taxes? Where is it all going? I refuse to accept that we have to cough up more money in order to have decent city services.