Mayor Dennis Williams vetoed Wilmington City Council’s plan to cut more than 511,000 dollars in funds originally budgeted to the city’s fire department.
Williams signed his veto of the budget amendment authorizing he cuts Friday at the North Tatnall Street firehouse, saying he would not abandon his campaign promise to make no cuts to public safety.
“No matter what the consequences are to this administration, we will stand form for public safety," Williams said. "And I look forward to working with City Council in the future, but this time it's something that we just cannot do. We can't agree on this, so I guess the battle lines are drawn.”
Council passed the amendment cutting money allocated to fill eight currently vacant positions last Thursday, citing the need to get a better grip on city spending.
[caption id="attachment_65094" align="alignright" width="300"]
Williams wasjoined with council members who voted against the amendment, as well as with city firefighters and their union representatives as he signed the veto.
City Fire Chief Anthony Goode says the veto shows faith in the department, and that cuts and measures taken during the recession are no longer necessary.
"Those were only measures to control spending, not a measure to save dollars," said Goode. "And when you start looking at it as a measure to save dollars, it hurts individuals and we can't do that anymore. It's already hurt enough for everyone. It puts our firefighters in danger, it puts civilians in danger."
City Council President Theo Gregory, in a statement, said the mayor’s public safety argument is without merit and he is considering calling City Council into session to override the veto.
“The majority of City Council supports the process we have begun to review the spending history and practices of City government and we’ll continue with those efforts,” said Gregory in his statement. “Council wants to work with the Administration to make intelligent and practical decisions about reducing expenditures and seeking greater efficiencies in government operations,” said Gregory. “However, the Administration cannot continue the pattern of looking to citizens and businesses for more taxes and fees, while ignoring substantial cost savings from a smaller and more efficient government.
It’s uncertain if council has the support needed to override the veto. The budget amendment passed 8-5. Nine votes are needed to override.