Precinct 3 JP questions staffing cut in his office
In an effort to do the best job possible for our community it is very important that we work together and look at the budget proposal objectively.
The budget must not be composed of hypothetical theories on paper but must be a workable plan that has substance and makes good common horse sense.
Although the goal before us is to cut the budget we must not sacrifice service and reliability by creating a situation that fosters poor performance.
While studying the proposed budget for the JP3 office, the following plans that defy logic and reason became very apparent.
It is hard to see the benefits in the following plans that constantly contradict our goals of responsibility and integrity we have for our community.
The first glaring and most obvious contradiction would be to expect an office to produce more income after cutting the staff in half. Here are facts of the proposal and the questions that they generate:
• JP3 brought in nearly as much revenue as the other three JP offices combined. This was accomplished with two full-time clerks and at times an additional part-timer.
Having a staff this size enabled us to generate the following income in the two-plus years I have been in office:
A) $216,361.00 by researching delinquent fines which were turned over to collection agency.
B) $1,141,443.00 by processing all other revenue.
Obvious conclusion—It took a lot of man hours to accomplish these results.
• The 2014 budget calls for an increase of revenue in Precinct 3, from $218,000 in 2013 to $220,000 in 2014.
Questions—Does it make sense to expect more income with an inadequate staff? How can one clerk be expected to generate this kind of revenue?
• In the proposed 2014 budget, JP3 will have the lowest budget of all precincts.
Question—Three times the work load of any other precinct with the lowest budget. How will this work?
• JP3 has the lowest paid clerks in Mi lam County by $3000 to $5000 per year.
Questions—How do you keep qual ity employees that are resentful when they are expected to do three times the work of the other precincts for less pay? Where is the common sense in this?
Doesn’t it make more sense that an overworked staf f becomes less efficient and more resentful?
• Staff in JP3 office will be cut by 5 0% w here o ther o ffices a re cutting by 15-17%.
Questions—Isn’t this too drastic? How can we justify this?
• We have been promised at least a part time position, however it’s not written in the budget. History proves that in government, if it is not in writing, it won’t happen.
Question—How can we be sure that we will be able to retain this position?
Precinct 3 JP
313 North Main