It’s a familiar political pantomime: On the trail, Candidate X makes an issue of public-safety costs. The public-safety unions – which, just coincidentally, support Candidate Y – issue a terse statement, questioning Candidate X. But in a very uncertain economy, arguments over budgeting, jobs, and salaries take on heightened implications.
This go-round, “Candidate X” is mayoral contender Brewster McCracken. Late last week, the leaders of the combined public-safety unions – the Austin Police Association, the Austin Firefighters Association, and the Austin/Travis County EMS Employees Association – issued a collective statement taking McCracken to task for his campaign talk about public-safety salaries. McCracken has repeatedly called for the unions to renegotiate their salary contracts if and when the economy worsens, asking them, in his campaign parlance, to “share in the sacrifice.” Clearly smarting from the fact they’ve already made reductions – police cut more than $3 million in costs in midyear reductions – the unions released a statement claiming, “McCracken has called for salary cuts for all City of Austin employees,” adding that such talk is “premature and political. Even the City Manager, who is responsible for managing the City budget, has not called for such cuts.” Of course, their missive also contains a reminder that the unions have endorsed Lee Leffingwell and a note that they’ve committed to him “that if salary cuts for all City employees ever do become necessary in the future, we will sit down with the Mayor, City Council and the City Manager to discuss how Police, Fire and EMS employees can be part of the solution to the city’s budgeting challenges … our commitment is to be part of the solution.”
The unions are stretching the truth to a degree: As McCracken spokesman Colin Rowan points out regarding salary cuts, his candidate “isn’t calling for them yet.” Rowan says McCracken’s message has always been that “if we are going to do pay freezes and if we are going to do pay cuts, then they need to be fair and across the board” and not unfairly prioritize public-safety salaries over any other city sectors. Moreover, the campaign says, with the city facing an estimated $30 million shortfall for the next fiscal year while 80% of the city budget is tied to salaries and benefits, a shared reduction may be the best way out of the hole. “Brewster has never said, ‘I’m gonna go after the cops and reduce their salary,'” says Rowan. “His point has been all along … that each department needs to share in the sacrifice.”
Still, “it’s way premature” to be talking cuts, APA President Wayne Vincent told the Chronicle. “The city manager isn’t even out there saying the sky is falling. To ask to renege on a contract, that’s huge. … I would think that Brewster McCracken or somebody would have called and would sit down and talk with us first.”
This article appears in May 1 • 2009.