Support for LAist comes from
We Explain L.A.
Stay Connected

Share This

This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.

This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.


Nearly 1,000 Layoffs Loom at City Hall as Money Runs Out

Photo by Alan Heitz via LAist Featured Photos/Flickr
Before you
Dear reader, we're asking you to help us keep local news available for all. Your tax-deductible financial support keeps our stories free to read, instead of hidden behind paywalls. We believe when reliable local reporting is widely available, the entire community benefits. Thank you for investing in your neighborhood.

Facing a $405-million budget deficit, Mayor Villaraigosa earlier this summer asked city employees to share the sacrifice. A major deal was struck with civilian union employees by letting 2,400 employees retire early within five years. That plan needed City Council approval and with months of no action, things have changed. Mostly, $75 million in projected tax revenue did not come in meaning early retirement at this point would only save $12 million. And add this: "the city is overspending at a rate that would cause it to run out of money one month before the end of the budget year," according to the LA Times.

Some within the city are saying the best action now is the most devastating to employees: laying off 926 workers, which includes 162 civilian employees at the LAPD and 70 workers at the city attorney's office. Also, 26 days of furloughs, or roughly a 10 percent pay cut, for every single civilian employee over the next nine months has been called for. There's also some talk of letting the LAPD drop in size by not continuing to hire in effort of the 10,000 officers goal. To that, the an LA Times editorial says it's not a good idea.

City Council will discuss the issue today, possibly voting on a plan.