Group 2
Moderators: Carolyn Chernoff, Ellen Petersen and Eddie Battle
Total points: 47.5

Group Description:
The group had 27 members, 12 females and 15 males. There were 16 White and 11 Black participants. Their ages ranged from early 20s to mid to late 60s. The group was composed of professionals, community volunteers, special-interest-group advocates, and concerned/ interested citizens.

Participants were ready to work. They were attentive when given their process overview and charges by moderators. There were questions. Members were relaxed and confident in the moderators and the goals for the evening. Citizens were energetic and cooperative. All points of contention and exchanges of views were civil. No one dominated the group, or felt “silenced,” the moderators and group structure prevented this possibility. The group didn’t get to the “Gut Wrenchers” bucket. One participant completed the process and at the end appeared to be a dissenter. No dissenting sheets were filed. Members said they were pleased with the process and their work for the evening.

Some participants left 5 to 10 minutes before the session ended, causing percentage changes in voting.

Low Hanging Fruit
Total points: 16
• # 3 DROP program: 4 points
o The program has been abused by elected officials. It should be for everyone.
o 75+ % of the vote
• # 26b Wage Tax/Commuter: 5 points
o This is a small increase but a significant amount of revenue. Many commuters can afford it. The increase was .1% to 3.5997%.
o 75+ % of the vote
• # 20 Eagles: 4 points
o This choice was supported with enthusiasm.
o 100% of the vote
• # 17 Amusement: 3 points
o “Can we push from 6% to 10%?”
o 75+ % of the vote

No Ways, No Hows
Total points taken off the table: 83
• # 11 Police: 52 points
o 16/21=76% of the vote
• # 14 Recreation: 5 points
o “Don’t recreation centers operate at half day anyhow because of school?” “Nope.” “No further cuts.” “I would vote No Ways, No Hows (NWNH) if I know all programs were licensed. The city is liable.” (Another participant stated)… “but, it gets the kids off the streets.” “Recreation programs keep people out of prison.” The group voted 15 to 21 at first and finally 17 to 21 to place this choice in NWNH.
o The group initially wrestled with a 10% recreation decrease. But decided against this choice by voicing concerns about lost jobs vs. points gained and concerns for kids.
o 17/21=80+ % of the vote
• # 13 Public Health: 7 points
o 16/21=76% of the vote
• # 6 Free Library: 3 points
o “Goes back to the prisons.” “Children with access to libraries help to keep them out of prison.”
o 17/21=80+ % of the vote
• # 7 and #8 Housing and Human Services were combined: 16 points
o “Can we combine Housing and Human Services?”
o 19/19=100% of the vote

Shared Pain
Total points: 31.5
• # 21 Parking: 2 points
o 50 +% of the vote
• # 22a Real Estate: 5 points
o “Collect unpaid taxes.” “Lots of condos, etc.”
o “Tax higher income people.”
o “What about people hurt by gentrification projects?” “Pass anti-gentrification ordinances.”
o 50 +% of the vote
• #24 Sales: 6 points
o “Four years ago the tax was higher. (Citizens) haven’t noticed changes. But would notice change in services.”
o 50 +% of the vote
• #25b Wage Tax / Resident: 12 points
o “4.49 wage tax= 60 points.”
o “Council already passed exemption for low-wage workers.”
o “Would be less regressive than what we have now…cutting services (is) a disincentive.”
o “Connected to commuter tax…if one rises the other rises.” “Actually no.”(The city representative told the group that wage commuter and resident taxes don’t automatically rise together.)
o Votes on wage/resident tax were 14/25 for a .01 % increase and 9/24 for an increase of .02 %.
o “Remember, people have left the city, lost revenue, because of wage tax.”
o 50 +% of the vote
• # 15c Streets: 6.5 points
o “Pay-As-You- Throw… how could this tax be collected?”
o “$5/week too much for many”
o $2.50, $10/month, received 11 of 21 votes.
o “Encourages recycling.”…”Important for recycling.”
o “Concerns about a flat fee.”
o “What about tenants?”
o “Cost less to collect this revenue.”
o “Concern about littering.”
o “Strain on low income people.”
o As proposed (13 pts.) 9/25=36% of the vote. Modified to 6.5 points (see above.)

Gut Wrenchers
• We didn’t get to these choices.

Big, Hairy, Ambitious Goals
• We didn’t get to these choices.

Memorable Quotes
• “20% cuts unrealistic anywhere.”
• “Why can’t we have more smaller cuts across the board?”
• # 12 Prisons
o “Reduce inmate population especially for nonviolent and drug offenders.” “Keep reentry/job training (programs), and rehab services.”
o “Is this possible at 20% cut?” (The participant found it incredulous to cut the prison budget by 20 %.)
o “Rethink three strikes/life imprisonment.”
o “Want more spending on social services to help people avoid prison.”
o “A 20% cut will have a negative impact, make conditions worse.”
o There were six votes to reduce the prison budget by 10%.
• # 16, Vehicle Fleet
o “Can we reduce fleet and have cheaper vehicles?”
o “Does this include DHS cars?”
o “They (DHS staff) already use own cars, get mileage reimbursement.”
o “What might a 5% cut look like?”
o We need to look for efficiency, force city to better manage (its vehicles).”
o “What are these vehicles used for?”
o “Want tiered options (10%, 20 %, 30 % reductions).”
• # 23 Real Estate Transfer
o “Huge problem for city. It deters home buyers. It’s 1% in the surrounding area.”
o “Tax could be absorbed by those able to buy expensive property. But, they have other options.”
o “Cutting service (is a) disincentive too…hard choices!”
• “We’re not even close to 100 points. Democracy is not picking your poison (choosing cuts in service or raising taxes) but making choices.”