LOCKPORT — So long as a majority votes to override the state’s so-called tax cap, the Common Council will also vote tonight on adoption of a 2012 city budget that calls for a 3.4 percent tax rate reduction.

There were some disharmony in the Council meeting room Tuesday night, as the aldermen convened to go over the proposed $23.2 million budget one more time, line by line, with an eye on cuts.

Fourth Ward Alderman Andrew Chapman and 2nd Ward Alderman Jack Smith were pushing for more bigger line cuts, in areas including staffing, because while the tax rate may be decreasing by 52 cents per $1,000 of property value, the year-over-year increase in the tax levy — the amount of city spending being covered by property tax — is still 9 percent.

The state is now requiring municipalities to adhere to a 2 percent levy increase, or put the choice to “override” the cap up to a vote in front of the public. Four of six aldermen have to vote “yes” on the proposed local law, after a public hearing at 6 tonight in Council chambers, or the Council can’t hold a vote on the proposed budget.

Smith takes exception to Common Council President Richelle Pasceri’s use of the phrase “tax cut,” suggesting there’s no such thing when the tax levy is rising. The rate may be lower, but the levy, $10.5 million, is almost $900,000 more than in 2011.

“For most people in the city, this will mean an increase in their tax bill (I know it will in mine!),” Smith wrote in a Monday e-mail to his fellow aldermen. “Another budget will be adopted that contains no meaningful reform to ensure a fiscally viable future for our city and residents.”

Smith’s e-mail urged line item cuts including: elimination of the community services aide in Lockport Police Department, a full-time position filled by a civilian, Mark Sanders, who’s a liaison between police and residents; ending the LPD-staffed School Resource Officer position that’s half funded by Lockport City School District; scrapping a commitment to hire a full-time housing inspector; and zeroing out city funding for the professional stage used by performers in the summertime Canal Concert Series.

Those line cuts would reduce the 2012 levy by close to $200,000.

They wouldn’t get the city under the tax-cap limit — but they would diminish services to residents, and when the tax rate is decreasing that’s not necessary, Pasceri said.

“Every single dollar we allocate represents a person and a service they offer, and I do not believe residents are clamoring for layoffs or service cuts; if anything, they want more services,” she said. “With this budget we are maintaining services, there are no layoffs, and there is a tax cut. This, to me, is a win-win for this community.”

Smith raised all but the proposed School Resource Officer cut in person at the Tuesday work session and got little or no support from the rest of the Council.

Several aldermen, including at-large representative Joe Kibler, said they were annoyed by Smith’s “eleventh hour” proposals, as Smith hadn’t raised them earlier in numerous budget workshops.

“He pulled this stunt last year too, when he said the day before we voted on the (2011) budget that he wanted to lay off 10 police officers,” Kibler said. “To me, he sounds like a defeated candidate trying to go out in style.”

Even Smith’s usual ally, Chapman, didn’t support a few of Smith’s proposals, although he did argue that “conceptually,” the Council should be prepared to start making job cuts now, instead of pushing the task off to next year.

To the majority’s refrain, that job cuts could be considered in 2013, after review of the possible impacts and upcoming contract talks with five employee unions, Chapman asked, “Why not now? There’s a (9) percent spending increase on the table; taxes are increasing. Start the cuts now, let’s go for 10 percent.”

“You don’t sit down the day before the budget (vote) and decide how many people to cut. That’s irresponsible,” Mayor Michael Tucker countered.

Chapman also suggested the Council scrap the deal that Tucker struck with four unions to defer annual replenishing of members’ health savings accounts to early 2013. It’s merely a $450,000 “loan” that’ll come due in the 2013 budget, and it makes the Council indebted to the unions as they’re heading into contract negotiations, he argued.

The loan payment may not come due, if administration can negotiate reduction or elimination of the health savings accounts before 2013, Tucker said.

Declining the deferment, and then blaming the unions for the sudden budget hole, would set a “bad tone” for contract negotiations, retiring 3rd Ward Alderman Flora McKenzie warned.

Unilateral benefit reductions, and layoffs, have come back to haunt City Hall in the past, retiring City Clerk/Budget Director Dick Mullaney added.

“Dollar for dollar, you’re paying their wages in unemployment and (history shows) they go to court and get their jobs back anyway, so you’re not saving any money,” he said. “It is far better for you to negotiate” benefits and job changes.

Of city spending on the concert stage, rather than cut the $79,200 line outright, Chapman suggested the Council rethink the series frequency and promoter, or consider earmarking bed tax money that it’s been paying Niagara Tourism & Convention Corporation instead. Tucker said he’s not necessarily opposed to redirecting bed tax — it’s true, NTCC never has spelled out exactly what Lockport gets in return for its $85,000 annual investment in Niagara USA promotion — but he disagreed the change could be made immediately. Local tour operators could pay a price if the city pulls out; and their counsel on the effects, or at least fair warning the city is pulling out, is necessary, he said.

As of today, the proposed 2012 general budget drives a tax rate of $14.73 per $1,000 of assessed property value. The 2011 rate is $15.25.