POCATELLO — A list of suggested personnel cuts from a Pocatello City council member that was made public last week took center stage during a budget hearing at City Hall Thursday evening.

Council member Claudia Ortega’s suggested cuts to various city personnel and some of the city’s social services and departments were the central topics among residents who spoke on the budget Thursday, despite the fact that none of her suggested cuts were actually included in Pocatello’s proposed budget for 2022.

Some tension arose when Ortega at one point during the meeting asked Pocatello Mayor Brian Blad to publicly announce that none of her cuts, which some city officials have likened to a “hit list,” were included in the budget. Blad seemingly ignored her request and called on the next resident to speak, though he did remind speakers to refrain from offering public comments on topics not related to the city’s proposed budget.

Ortega ultimately made the announcement herself at the end of the public comment period.

“I did respond to Ortega and told her that what the speakers were talking about was certainly part of the budgeting process,” Blad said when contacted after the City Council meeting Thursday night. “And I did stop one person who was making personal attacks to three of the City Council members and asked that she remain on topic. But this list was absolutely a part of the budgeting process this year.”

Ortega disagreed with Blad when contacted after the meeting. She said that because her list was never officially submitted to the City Council or the city’s financial department, it effectively had nothing to do with the proposed budget and speakers should not have been allowed to publicly comment on specifics of the list.

“The list, my request for information, was not part of this budget, so it was inappropriate for this list to be discussed during the budget hearing tonight,” Ortega said. “This list was never a part of the budget process or officially submitted in any way, but it works for (Blad) to vilify me because he is up for reelection. Maybe I should be grateful because at least now more people are aware of the issues that this city faces.”

About one dozen local residents provided public comments on the proposed budget. Some residents spoke of the need to protect the social services Ortega proposed as budget cuts including maintaining the public library, keeping team youth sports and supporting the city’s Parks and Recreation Department and the numerous parks and facilities it oversees. Others spoke out against the budget, criticizing the methods in which it was balanced and prepared.

“I moved here in October to be more actively involved with my grandchildren who are (ages) 12, 8, 7 and 5,” said Pocatello resident Ruta Casabianca. “Although Pocatello has a lot to offer, I think it is important for Pocatello to invest in educational and positive recreation programs like parks, library services and team as well as non-team sports. Instead of cutting back on these positive programs, they need to be enhanced. If we don’t, we will pay the cost in other ways.”

Josh Mansfield, the director of operations for Superior Physical Therapy, which has locations in Idaho Falls and Pocatello, said that a prospective physician would only work for the company on the condition that he never work in Pocatello. The physician followed the news of Pocatello and the views of the city on social media and decided the Gate City was not the place for him and his family, Mansfield said.

“I believe that Pocatello is a place where I can raise my family — one that offers the kind of services that many described today,” Mansfield said. “I believe that the draconian budget cuts recommended by certain City Council members tries to pretend that there is not a fiscal benefit to things like parks, libraries or team sports. ... As you continue to pretend that there is a way for you to cut services without attracting young professionals to come and perform important services here in this city then it’s not just a question of attracting businesses but attracting those who work in them.”

Other residents spoke about the specific city employee positions that Ortega proposed to cut, including Public Works Department and Fire Department positions.

A former project manager in the city’s Public Works Department, Maggie Clark, who resigned effective July 20 after taking a job in the private sector, spoke out against Ortega’s proposed Public Works cuts.

“I was listed on the streamlining list along with several of my colleagues,” Clark said. “I understand that doing a thorough assessment to find redundancies is just proper management, however, I feel that the approach of simply looking at organizational charts is not the way to make a fully-informed decision.”

As an example, Clark said that she and one other employee within the city’s Public Works Department worked tirelessly during the 2020-21 grant cycle to secure over $5.5 million in grant money for the city, leveraging less than $500,000 of city funds to do so.

Council members Heidi Adamson and Linda Leeuwrik both thanked Clark for the value she brought to the city over the past few years.

Andy Moldenhauer, president of the Pocatello firefighters union, also spoke during the meeting Thursday. He said he approved of the budget, particularly because it wasn’t balanced on the backs of city employees.

Lydia Noble and Heather Disselkoen, the co-founders of the local government watchdog group Pocatello For Accountable Government Entities, or PAGE, both spoke out against the city’s proposed budget, calling into question the way in which it was brought into balance and its unsustainability in the future.

Noble said she does not agree with this budget because of “how it was brought into balance by removing funds from the general fund city savings account and by virtually wiping out the capital improvement fund.”

“This is not the way to structurally and correctly balance a city budget or any budget,” Noble said. “It’s basically a one-time temporary fix that just cannot continue every year. The right way to balance a budget is to ensure that recurring expenses are offset with recurring revenues.”

Disselkoen’s public comments centered on the notion that the decisions the city makes this year will carry forward for the next three to five years “and could impact our ability to be competitive as a city.”

“When faced with a structurally imbalanced budget there are essentially two directions you can take — you can increase revenue or you can look for ways to reduce expenditures, or something in the middle,” Disselkoen said. “If you are of the opinion a lack of revenue is the problem, your only option is to increase the levied tax ask, that portion of the budget that local taxpayers pay. If increasing revenue is the game plan for addressing the city’s budget issues, then own it.”

The budgetary process moving forward will involve the City Council discussing the public comments provided Thursday and any other comments the city has received regarding the budget during an upcoming meeting at 1:30 p.m. Aug. 11. The council intends to discuss the budget further during a work session at 9 a.m. Aug. 12 and the proposed budget will be put back in front of the City Council for final consideration at 6 p.m. Aug. 19.

All the meetings will be held at City Hall.