The state takes over

May 9, 2012 · Posted in DC Examiner · Comment 

Tonight the Wicomico Society of Patriots (WSOP) will hold an “emergency meeting” to discuss impending state action on the county’s budget, making the claim that “your property tax cap is dead!” One may ask why the budgetary woes of a comparatively small county on the Eastern Shore are relevant to both the functions of the state and to those reading this piece. To answer that question, a little bit of history is required.

In 2000 the Wicomico County Council, which at the time held both the legislative and executive functions of county government, enacted a huge property tax increase – a whopping 46 cents per $100 of assessed valuation – on county homeowners. Angered by the surge in both taxation and spending, county residents enacted a revenue cap later that year at the 2000 election. This cap limited the revenue from property taxes to an amount no more than 2 percent over the previous year’s take.

(continued at Examiner.com…)

Share

Solutions to our problems

Tonight Wicomico County Councilman Bill McCain hosted a townhall-style meeting designed to solicit solutions to the county’s present and upcoming budget woes. While yesterday’s Daily Times article pointed out that McCain was looking for suggested possible fixes, many of the nearly two dozen speakers had a single message: taxes are too high and they couldn’t afford anymore increases there. “Stay within your budget,” warned resident Kay Gibson.

A number of speakers echoed their personal economic struggles; resident Ed Nelson said it well when he noted, “times are tough for everyone.”

But Bill was blunt: “you will have serious, serious services eliminated in Wicomico County” next year – “what are you willing to give up?” He continued, “we need to do things differently…unfortunately, we have capped ourselves on the revenue side.”

McCain is in somewhat of a unique position, as the FY2011 budget will be the last he’ll have input into – he’s chosen not to seek re-election, maintaining his original plan to serve one term. But he was determined to maintain his home and business here, so it’s obvious McCain is planning to stay involved. Two other council members who would presumably maintain their positions, John Cannon and Sheree Sample-Hughes, were also in attendance.

The county’s Board of Education was also a favorite whipping boy of some. Many speakers advocated the accountability an elected school board would provide.

On that note, all three Council members present were put on the spot by questioner Joe Collins, who wanted to know how they stood on an elected school board. McCain was a firm “no,” citing the “diverse” school board we presently have. Cannon and Sample-Hughes held their cards closer to their chest, with John stating a “70-30″ likelihood of support and Sample-Hughes wanting to study the particulars more – she did indicate her district was relatively supportive as was she on a personal level.

While a number of speakers commented on the revenue cap and didn’t want to see it go away, a couple observers pled for “investment.” Mark Cullen, representing the county’s volunteer firefighters, pointed out that the $4 million provided by the county covers less than half of the expenses. Instead, we’re “burning our personnel out doing fundraisers.” (Surely there was no pun intended.)

County resident John Groutt blasted the “simplistic” solutions offered by the number of “TEA Partiers” in the audience and preached “we need to invest in our children.” We also needed to address the issue of sprawl. On the other hand, it was also properly pointed out that areas which tax heavily tend to have difficulty maintaining businesses and jobs.

Most of those commenting were critical of the county’s current spending, but there were a number of good ideas pitched for consideration. Among them were:

  • Hiring a full-time auditor. The problem is that the county’s charter dictates the auditor be a CPA but the salary may not be sufficient.
  • Rein in the liquor control board.
  • Make union negotiations public as they are in Calvert County.
  • Eliminate the two at-large County Council positions.
  • Eliminate the County Executive’s Public Information Officer.
  • Instead of layoffs being the “last resort” they should be the “first resort.”
  • Replace the revenue cap with a tax rate cap, with exemptions for those on fixed incomes.
  • Rescind the increase in teacher’s retirement benefits.
  • Verify that all measures called for in the 2002 Parsons study are being followed.
  • Selling off any surplus land the county owns (my idea.)
  • Perhaps collecting some sort of tax on property owned by Salisbury University (also my idea.)

It’s worthy of note that in the last decade Wicomico County went from having the fourth highest property tax rate in the state to the fourth lowest. And if you consider education, public safety, and public works as “core functions” of government, McCain said that we spend 76% of our budget dollars on those items.

There’s no question that severe cuts will be seen when County Executive Rick Pollitt releases his FY2011 budget April 8th. But the dialogue tonight seems to suggest that raising taxes is going to be out of the question for overburdened county residents who will likely see tax increases on the federal and state levels.

Share

Ideas for the right direction

On Thursday the BrinkleyPipkin budget reduction act (in Maryland that’s SB1004, Budget Reconciliation and Balancing Act) had its hearing. When I got the release on this hearing this was the part which jumped out at me:

The Brinkley-Pipkin budget reduction act had a hearing before the Senate Budget and Tax Committee today. By taking significant steps to further reduce spending in this year’s budget process, the Brinkley-Pipkin plan buys additional time to constrain spending to the existing available revenues without the need to raise taxes.
 
A key feature of the plan is the elimination of built-in statutory increases in state programs. This feature and an additional $75 million in spending constraint over the next three years would allow current revenues to “catch-up” with spending, thereby bringing ongoing spending and revenues into balance.

Many lobbyists and county officials testified today against additional cuts to state spending. Representatives of unions also opposed the Brinkley-Pipkin plan of additional cutbacks including the removal prevailing wage from state projects. The majority of citizens and taxpayers who testified supported all efforts to cut back government overspending. (Emphasis mine.)

So once again we have the government and big-government interests (i.e. the lobbyists) vs. the people. The information I was provided also had a chart showing the difference between our current budget path (which will certainly lead to higher taxes) and the Brinkley-Pipkin projections.

In theory, at least, the Republicans’ proposal not only balances the budget but creates a small surplus.

Obviously the counties were there to argue that the budget would be balanced on their backs and perhaps they have a point. But this should also lead the local governments into an effort to prioritize what services they wish to deliver, with the public being involved by determining how much they want to pay. For example, it would fan the flames of the ongoing debate here in Wicomico County regarding the revenue cap the county currently employs.

Government cannot co-exist with a free society as a cure-all. Every dollar taken out of your pocket to pay for services they wish to deliver is a dollar that you cannot use as you wish, despite the fact it was freely given to you. (In more and more cases, however, that dollar was given to you by the same government who wishes to take it away.)

It’s way beyond time to consider that role government has to play and amend it accordingly. Maybe not all of the cuts in the Brinkley-Pipkin proposal are wise, but they can begin this vital discussion of the role our state government plays in our lives.

Share

Please note that the opinions expressed on monoblogue are not necessarily those of the Wicomico County Republican Party Central Committee, of which I'm a member. (But they probably should be.)