Here’s a look at Whitehall’s $37.7 million budget for 2025

The Whitehall City Council will vote Tuesday on the city’s proposed $37.7 million spending budget for 2025, which includes nearly $9.5 million for the city’s police division, more than $6 million dollars for the city’s maintenance services, nearly $6.5 million for the city’s fire division and more than $1.4 million. reserved at the town hall.

The $37,705,342 spending plan for next year is slightly higher than the city’s 2024 budget, which was $36,942,538. In his November memo submitted with his proposed budget, Whitehall Mayor Michael T. Bivens said the city’s tax revenue, which is the largest source of revenue for the city of just over 20 000 inhabitants, should be $1.3 million lower than expected. budgeted for 2024.

Bivens said city officials expect income tax revenues for 2025 to “return to prior growth trends as Whitehall’s major employers require remote workers to return to the office.” Based on that assumption, the mayor said the city projects $35 million in income tax revenue next year, a 17% increase from 2024 projections.

In addition to the city’s budget, Council members are also expected to vote on a resolution Tuesday on whether to authorize an investigation into their troubled police division that protects the 5.3-mile city.

Here’s a look at what the city’s proposed budget would fund for 2025.

25% of the budget proposed to Whitehall for police and salaries

Just over 25 percent of the city’s $37.7 million budget is earmarked for the Whitehall Police Division, with the majority funding the salaries of the division’s approximately 40 police officers as well as the public safety director.

Of the nearly $9.5 million allocated to the police division, more than $6.88 million would go to fund police salaries. The rest of the funds, nearly $2.6 million, would be distributed between various departmental expenses and employee salaries.

Under the proposed budget, the public safety director would receive an annual salary of $27,450.

More than $1.4 million allocated to the Whitehall Mayor’s Office

Under the proposed budget, Mayor Bivens’ administration would receive $1,433,343 for 2025. In addition to the mayor’s $105,000 annual salary, the budget will fund the salaries of key administrators listed under the mayor’s office:

Director of Development — $110,410.00
Executive assistant to the mayor — $80,000
Economic development specialist — $73,500
Community Affairs Specialist — $65,000

The proposed budget for the mayor’s office also includes $200,000 for a food and truck festival, $7,500 for a court interpreter and salaries for the information technology team totaling more than $360. $000.

Budget proposal includes increased salary caps for public safety

Salary and hour scales for several public safety positions would also increase under the proposed budget:

Public Service Director (hourly): maximum salary increase from $54.71 to $55.57
Prosecutor/Deputy City Attorney (salary): increase from $80,000 to $85,000
Deputy chiefs of police: $75.95 per hour to $78.23 per hour
Deputy Fire Chief: $75.95 to $78.23 per hour
Chief of Police: $85.82 to $88.39 per hour

Decision to investigate Whitehall Police Department imminent

Video: Whitehall mayor defends police chief and department after union criticism

At a press conference on August 2, Whitehall Mayor Michael Bivens and Chief Mike Crispen denied the FOP’s allegations that Whitehall police were meeting ticket or arrest quotas and said a FOP investigation did not reflect the culture of the department.

Council members will also decide Tuesday whether to introduce a resolution to investigate the work environment in the city’s troubled police division.

The impending vote has been the subject of much debate since it was proposed. Brian Steel, recently re-elected president of the Fraternal Order of Police Capital City Lodge No. 9, which represents Whitehall police officers, urged the council to adopt the resolution. Steel cited complaints about division ticket quotas, demeaning behavior by command staff and “unethical and unconstitutional behavior.”

“This investigation is necessary to preserve the integrity of law enforcement and build trust between the police (division) and the community it serves,” Steel said in a prepared statement Nov. 12.

“The time to act is now, and I implore all members of Whitehall City Council to take a stand and vote ‘yes’ after completing the required readings to move this investigation forward and finally provide accountability and justice. “

Council member Gerard Dixon proposed the resolution, which states that the investigation was requested because “members of the Whitehall Police (division) shared concerns with Council regarding the management and work environment within of the department”.

The proposal faced significant opposition from other City Council members during its first reading, including Whitehall Mayor Michael Bivens and Council President Thomas Potter.

“It’s not in the best interest of the city,” Potter said at a Nov. 12 council meeting. Bivens criticized Dixon and questioned whether he was overstepping his bounds as a council member by trying to pass the resolution.

How the review and investigation would be conducted was unclear in the proposed resolution, which said only that the method “shall be determined by future order or resolution.”

The investigation would also follow the recent firing of two Whitehall police officers, including a female officer accused of fabricating a confession that led to the arrest and imprisonment of a woman, according to an internal department investigation. The other, earlier firing involved a police officer who made what the police chief and mayor considered derogatory comments about the city while on duty and in uniform.

Steel said the firings were both motivated by the fact that the executives involved were union representatives or had been active in the union.

If the council were to approve the investigation resolution, Bivens would also have to approve and sign it within 10 business days, according to the Whitehall City Charter. If he does not approve it, he must return it to the council with his objections within the same 10 day period.

If the mayor refuses to sign the resolution and returns it to council, council members must reconsider the resolution within one week. Council members must then have a two-thirds vote of support for the resolution to take effect without the mayor’s signature, the charter states.

[email protected]

@ShahidMeighan