For my first job in college, I worked at a construction company. I worked in a shop with mechanics and welders. My job for this company was to keep the shop clean and travel to different places getting parts for the mechanics. It was a good job and I was paid $10 an hour.

A year after I worked for the company, my boss hired his nephew to do the same job I was doing. The company was getting more jobs so we needed more help. I worked hard and did everything I was told to do. My boss’ nephew was extremely lazy and constantly had to be told to do stuff. Half the time, he would hide behind sheds and equipment so he would not get caught doing nothing. He was frustrating to work with all the time.

One day we had to paint a big excavator that came into the shop. It was huge and would take all day to paint. The boy propped a chair up next to me and began telling me about his crazy weekend a few days before. While I was unresponsive and acting completely uninterested, he said something that changed the way I felt about my job. He looked at me with a paint can in hand and said, “This is crap getting paid $12 an hour to paint these stupid machines.” Completely baffled by what I just heard, I caught my breath and looked at him. I could not believe he made two dollars an hour more than me and he did not do any work half the time.

Since he was the nephew of the boss, he probably worked out a deal to pay him more. He was family after all, but it really burned me bad. How could he do the same exact job as me and make more money? It just was not fair. I was so mad I could not put my full effort into my job anymore.

About a year later, I was laid off because of lack of new excavating jobs the company was getting. I was worried at first because of bills and other expenses, but I was glad to go. I did not think it was fair that I was being paid less and I had worked there longer. It definitely rubbed me the wrong way.

I could investigate by looking into how many other family members were being paid more than other employees. The company had many people who were family members of my boss. This would make a good investigative story.

Huntington City Council Meetings

Ryan Bloomfield

City Council Meeting

1/11/10

The Huntington City Council had a meeting Monday night and discussed many items on the agenda. One of the major topics on the agenda was an ordinance about dog tethering. The ordinance would prohibit dog tethering throughout the city of Huntington. Dog tethering is when a dog owner leaves his or her dog unattended or chained up outside for long periods of time. This became an issue because the winter season has started.

When it came time to vote on the dog tethering ordinance, two Council members said there needs to be rewording in the ordinance. This is so people completely understand the affects/punishment after this ordinance is passed. The members agreed to delay the passing of the ordinance and have it put on the agenda for the next meeting.

Ryan Bloomfield

City Council Meeting

1/25/10

The Huntington City Council had a meeting Monday night and discussed many items on the agenda. The major topic on the agenda was the dog tethering ordinance. At the last city council meeting on Jan. 11, members of the council could not agree on the wording of the ordinance. At this meeting, the wording was changed and council passed the ordinance. This ordinance is different from the original because it now states a fine of up to $150.

Ryan Bloomfield

City Council Meeting

2/8/10

The Huntington City Council had a meeting Monday night and discussed many items on the agenda. At this meeting there were no items on the agenda concerning the dog tethering ordinance. However, during the meeting, many audience members told council members they have seen dogs unattended in yards throughout Huntington. Sandra Muthe, audience member said something needs to be done.

“I have seen two dogs unattended this week at two different houses,” Muthe said. What’s the point of passing the ordinance if nothing is being done about it?”

Jim Ritter, council member, said he would look into the situation and report the two incidents. This could be a possible investigative story for the end of the semester. There might be other incidents reported and I could look into seeing how many fines have been issued.

Huntington Museum of Art gets hit from recession

The recession has punched many nonprofit organizations in the Tri-State area, and the Huntington Museum of Art is one of many feeling the hit.

Last year, the Huntington Museum of Art struggled to meet its budget. It had a decrease of almost $9,000 from endowments and trusts. Margaret Mary Layne, executive director at the museum, said the recession has put the museum under pressure to meet its goals.

“Approximately fifty percent of the museum’s budget relies on investment returns from endowments and trusts that support the Huntington Museum of Art,” Layne said. “Obviously, when the stock market is down, the return on those investments is down.” Layne also said, “We are under great pressure to meet our professional goals and to maintain our service level to the community.”

The museum’s 2009-2010 budget is $2.1 million, which is $100,000 less than the 2007-2008 budget. The recession has forced the museum to make the cut because of less income coming in. An example of this is the 2010 Museum Ball. The ball is the percent of its $70,000 goal. In rough economic times, this is a success, but there is still a difference of $3,894 to balance the museum’s budget.

Another example is the Open Door Membership Campaign. The campaign is a yearlong fundraiser that started in 1970 to help bring in money for the museum. It represents 17 percent of funds the museum receives to support general operations such as electricity and water. In 2009, the campaign raised $320,000, which was 98 percent of its $325,000 goal. This is a raise in profit during the recession, but there is a difference of $5,000 the museum still needs to meet its budget. John Gillispie, public relations director at the museum, said the staff has a plan to come up with the money.

“We are going to increase revenue or cut various expenses,” Gillispie said. “During these tough economic times, we need to take all steps necessary to meet our budget.”

Gillispie also said the museum might use contingency funds, which are funds kept in reserve to guard against possible losses. These funds would make up the $8,894 difference from both fundraising events.

The museum also had a decrease in donations. The museum’s 990 forms from 2006 through 2008 show a decline of more than $4 million in net assets and more than $3 million in total revenue. In 2006, the museum’s net assets were $51.2 million, but in 2008, it was $47.2 million. This is a $4.4 million decline in two years. In 2007, it dropped more than $2 million going from $51.1 million to $49.1 million. Total revenue has also dropped. It went from $5.2 million in 2006, to $2.6 million in 2008. This is a $2.6 million decline in a two year time period. Also, it dropped from $5.1 million to $4.1 million in 2007.

Billie Karnes, director of finance at the museum, says things need to get better.

“It’s a very difficult time right now at the museum,” Karnes said. “It’s a difficult time financially for us and it makes it even more difficult because the recession is hurting everyone else.” Karnes also said, “The belt is as tight is it can get right now.”

Declining Net Assets and Total Revenue for the Huntington Museum of Art (2006-2008)

*Numbers are in millions

SOURCE: 2006, 2007, 2008 990 Forms

Huntington City Council approved a budget of $40.2 million, which is a raise of Mayor Kim Wolfe’s proposed budget of $39.5 million and a decrease in last year’s $44.6 million. The new budget shows reductions in 10 city departments such as fire, police and engineering.

At the meeting on March 21, City Council adopted a new budget for the fiscal year. They voted to cut the proposed budget by almost $900,000. The cut would lead to layoffs of at least 10 different city departments. Mayor Wolfe says keeping all city departments happy is difficult.

“You can’t keep everyone happy,” Wolfe said. “I try to make the best decisions that will benefit the city of Huntington.” “I want to leave Huntington a better place than what I found it when my term is through.”

The reduction affects 10 divisions and the personnel budget by large amounts. Some of the reductions include $26,573 for legal, $2,500 for City Council, $32,971 in building maintenance, $102,345 from the floodwall, $198,871 from police, $120,000 from fire and $165,000 from personnel. Some of the cuts from the fire and police department include overtime and new equipment. City Council has budgeted for $150,000 in Business and Occupation Tax increases on revenue and a decrease of $25,000 to the Huntington-Cabell-Wayne Animal Shelter. The city’s contributions would go from $100,000 to $75,000.

Huntington’s two biggest departments concerning expenses are fire and police. While there have been many cuts to different departments, fire and police make up almost half of the proposed budget. The total is more than $21 million. Wolfe said the safety of Huntington is the key to helping it grow.

“What we want to do is see Huntington grow,” Wolfe said. “If you don’t have a safe environment the city can’t flourish,” Wolfe also said, “Safety should always be the number one goal in order to improve Huntington.”

In previous meetings, Wolfe and council members discussed the proposed budget which had declining revenues due to the recession. This made the mayor propose furloughs for all city employees and layoffs to eight civilian employees in the police and fire departments in his first proposed budget. After discussion, council members have instead restored funding to prevent furloughs and layoffs in the police and fire departments. However, there are still 20-day furloughs, but they are only for public works and administrative employees. Council member Frances Jackson says furloughs are not always the best option.

“When you put people on furloughs you have less city services whether its fire or police or city workers,” Jackson said. “I don’t think furloughs are done efficiently and we don’t need our fire and police departments on them.” Jackson also said, “Furloughs mean there are less people serving our city.”

Along with the many departments taking a hit is the Huntington-Cabell-Wayne Animal Shelter. The approved budget is a $25,000 cut in the city’s $100,000 contribution to the animal shelter. The decrease will prevent the shelter from having a full-time and part-time dog warden position.

FY 2011 Budget Table

Division	Proposed Budget	Reduction Amount	Adopted Budget
Legal	$363,530	$26,573	$329,703
City Council	$94,210	$2,500	$91,710
Building Maintenance	$296,236	$32,971	$262,135
Engineering	$363,530	$35,987	$874,574
Finance	$908,732	$27,918	$858,078
Purchasing	$106,600	$100	$102,843
Floodwall	$648,677	$102,235	$534,187
Police	$10,741,819	$198,871	$11,069,488
Fire	$10,121,153	$120,000	$10,429,956
Personal	$1,194,534	$165,000	$9,266

Sources: City of Huntington Annual Budget Estimate, Levy Estimate

Budget Overview

In Mayor Kim Wolfe’s State of the City address, he explains how much money Huntington has and where that money is going in a new budget proposal.

With a total revenue and fund balance of $39,542,739, Wolfe plans on using this money in many different areas. Some include the Huntington Police Department, city council, engineering and building maintenance. This year’s budget is a $5,076,137 decrease from last year’s $44,618,876. The 2010-2011 budget also includes civilian layoffs and furloughs for all city employees. The city has already taken 10 percent from this year’s budget, which ends in June.

In his address, Wolfe discusses a budget that would propose cutbacks and remove some positions and furloughs, instead of massive layoffs. Wolfe said the furloughs would generate approximately $1.1 million in savings to the budget. He also said, “These furloughs would be spread out over the fiscal year and would be under the advisement of the respective manager.”

Mayor Wolfe's State of the City address

Huntington Mayor Kim Wolfe’s State of the City address was not just an insight of the progress and difficulties of Huntington, but a positive look at new things to come.

In his address, Wolfe discussed issues like living in difficult economic times and the effects of recession. However, he followed that up with positives like crime reduction and new partnerships. This is an attempt to remind people of Huntington the city is on its way to improvement and recovery. Wolfe says one way to reach these goals is by having safer streets.

“The increase in police officers has strengthened the patrol force,” Wolfe said. “With the increase of additional officers, we were able to see a reduction in the city’s crime rate by 3.9 percent.”

The drop in crime has been around since 2008. In 2008, the Huntington Police Department increased its strength by adding six new positions through the general fund. This was also done by contracting with Pullman Square and the Huntington-Ironton Empowerment Zone. This collaborative effort raised $60,000 for a full-time foot patrol officer in the downtown area. In an effort to keep a positive future, Wolfe has included the hiring of six additional officers.

Wolfe also discussed having responsive and efficient government in Huntington. He discussed last year’s Constituent Service Liaison and making Huntington a friendlier place for business and people.

“The creation of this position has allowed us to be more responsive to the needs of the community,” Wolfe said. “It provides the level of service that our citizens deserve.”

In last year’s address, Wolfe said the Constituent Service Liason would aide in the responsiveness of his administration. He said it would benefit by addressing issues and complaints and report the problem to the appropriate department. Based on his words, the Liaison has been working.

Strong partnerships and collaborations also play a factor in the success of Huntington. Wolfe says he has received significant attention for the partnership with the Greater Huntington Parks and Recreation District for the management of Harris Riverfront Park.

“As a result of turning the day-to-day operations and maintenance of Harris Riverfront Park over to the park district, the park is returning to being a destination we can be proud of in our downtown,” Wolfe said. “We are in the process of developing a master plan to strategize for the future growth and development of the park.”

He also said the Weed and Seed Program was a recognized at a national level for the efforts that took place during the first year of the program. He followed by saying, “the program saw real results that benefited our citizens.”

Wolfe’s address comes at a depressing time for Huntington. In a recent study by Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, Huntington was named one of the “10 unhappiest cities to live.” With Wolfe’s address and a year of opportunity ahead, Huntington can take a positive step into the future.

Rep. Alan Mollohan has represented the 1^st Congressional District of West Virginia in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1983, but David McKinley is trying to make a change.

McKinley is running to be the next representative to Congress from that district. His campaign started after candidate Dan Swisher dropped out. Swisher then threw his support to McKinley in hopes he can make a challenge for the seat held by Mollohan. McKinley says on his Web site he is ready for the race.

“My family and I are deeply honored by the wonderful response we have received after announcing my candidacy for West Virginia’s 1st Congressional District,” McKinley said. “This is an exciting opportunity to truly make a difference for our state and nation.”

McKinley’s campaign is coming into the race with some tough competition. His competitors include Thomas Stark, Andrew Warner and Mollohan. Mollohan is running for his 15^th term. The Federal Election Commission Web site shows that Mollohan has $343,575 for his campaign. He has $160,475 from individual contributions and $183,100 from political action committees. That amount is more than all other competitor’s funding combined. Thomas Stark has a total of $4,306 with $2,171 coming from individual contributions and $2,135 from self-funding. Andrew McCoy has $42,542 coming from individual contributions.

McKinley has $100,250 for his campaign. Almost all of his campaign money is self-funded, while $250 represents individual contributions. However, Mollohan still has the upper hand with more than $160,000 coming from individuals and the rest coming from contributions by other committees. Also, McKinley is the only candidate who is almost completely self-funded. The Federal Election Commission Web site shows all other candidates have at least 30 to 40 percent of their funding coming from individual contributions. After many attempts by phone and e-mail to get more information about his funding, McKinley declined to comment.

George Davis, political science professor at Marshall University, says funding for a campaign is an important part of any election.

“It makes a world of difference,” Davis said. “It matters how much is being used, how much is being given and how it plays a roll in the election.”

It can also be a tough thing to beat tradition. McKinley and the other candidates are trying to beat Mollohan. A task that may seem far, but not impossible. There is still time for McKinley and his campaign to get more funding, gain more recognition and make a run in the election.

“It’s going to be hard because you’re a fresh face and you’re trying to catch up, but it can be done,” Davis said. “People want to make a difference and some people just want to take a shot and see how and where they end up.” Davis also said he is interested to see who wins the election.