Helgeson, Garrett talk spending after furlough vote

City Councilman Jeff Helgeson says the Lynchburg government has failed in its duty to be fiscally prudent by continuing to spend on what he refers to as “aesthetic” projects such as the Fifth Street roundabout.

Helgeson, a second-term councilman representing Ward III, says his call for spending curbs is not related to his recently announced candidacy for the House of Delegates. He’s competing for the Republican nomination for the 23rd Disrict seat against At-large Councilman Scott Garrett.

During a meeting Tuesday, Councilman Ceasor Johnson accused Helgeson of political grandstanding in a debate about employee furloughs. “If you want to run for the House of Delegates, do it on your own time,” he snapped.

Helgeson, an opponent of the $1.5 million Fifth Street project, was arguing the furlough would be unnecessary if council had eschewed that spending. He moved they name the unpaid leave the “Thank you, Lynchburg City employees, for the Fifth Street roundabout” holiday.

Several council members feel Helgeson’s portrayal of the situation is inaccurate. He defended his position Wednesday and said his actions were not motivated by his bid for higher office.

“He (Johnson) may think and say what he wants, but I think you know and everyone at City Hall knows and everyone in the city knows that I’ve been fighting to reduce spending for the past five years,” he said.

“This is not a new idea. For the last five years I’ve been shouting from the hilltops, ‘Quit spending!’”

Council approved a 2½-day employee furlough by a 5-2 vote. Dissenting were Helgeson and Garrett.

Garrett, who tried to convince his peers to draw down on their contingency fund rather than furlough the city’s 1,200-some employees, said he felt Helgeson’s renaming motion was “ill advised.”

“That is not really going to resolve anything,” he said, reiterating an earlier suggestion that Helgeson is better at “ringing the bell” than finding solutions.

Raising the Fifth Street work, which started last month, does not help avoid furloughs and was not productive for the discussion, Garrett said.

“I didn’t vote for it either, but you got to move on,” he said of the streetscape project.

Garrett also said the Fifth Street money, which comes from one-time capital funding, cannot be transferred for salaries, which are reoccurring operating costs.

That assessment is backed by city staff, as well as several other council members. Helgeson, however, called it a “bureaucratic” argument and maintained the money could have been reallocated before construction started.

“If you have money in your left pocket, you can transfer it to your right pocket,” he said.

Helgeson, citing the economy, had asked council last fall to reconsider Fifth Street and other arguably non-utilitarian projects. Council did not act on his request. He repeated his position during a brief budget discussion in December.

“I bring forward solutions and council dismisses them,” he said, adding city employees are now paying the price.

Garrett had proposed council avoid the furlough — expected to save $415,000 — by taking from their $1.1 million contingency fund.

The contingency is a pool of money given to council annually to meet unexpected expenses, most commonly providing local matches for state and federal grants. In at least recent years, council has not spent the entire fund.

His plan drew no support on council. Several members said spending the contingency would weaken the city’s financial position at a time when revenues are plummeting.

“I don’t understand why we didn’t go ahead and use it last night,” Garrett said, noting the money was there and available for spending. “It sends a bad message."