Budget

May 5 2005 Council Budgeting Speech at CMW High School

I would like to begin by applauding this budgets increased commitment to Public Safety.  This is the number one concern and priority of our government. The growth of our counted has necessitated greater attention to these matters, leading to issues such as gang violence and the more innocent, yet just as serious, threat posed to residents in what seems to be an exponentially increasing rash of citizens, and especially teenagers, walking or even playing in the in the middle of the road after dark.   Hopefully the increased patrolling 10 additional deputies will permit will be utilized to warn residents of the risks posed to what used to be a joke phrase: “go play in the road.”

            The increased funding to volunteer fire companies and other public safety entities is another key feature of this budget, and I ask you to be sure to uphold these monies.

            I must admit, however, that the substantial increase of the budget - $20,839,248 to the general fund of the operating budget alone, according the executives message.   While the increased funding of programs is terrific, I am worried about the sustainability of such a hefty increase.  The last several budget years are an indication of what our county might have to go through at any moment.

            I would prefer a more cautious budget, which would establish a ‘rainy day’ fund against such inevitability as the next economic downturn is.  I also wish that a fund for future school construction was begun.  This would give the county a revenue source for when, however many construction projects from now it actually ends up being, work on a new Bel Air High is begins. 

            Funding for Patterson Mill has been found through the boons of this economic windfall, but there is no assurance that either the state or county will be able to do sue in the future.  Instead of attempting to budget the construction in one or two fiscal years, we should have a continual fund for all school construction projects.  Even in the best fiscal times, this reservoir could be used to increase the school capacity over the state allowance or to invest in long-term energy and cost saving measures.

            This is, however, simply advice for future budgets, as the council has little ability to make substantive revisions to the budget. 

I would like to take a moment to address something the council is considering doing, and that is removing the proposed 2 cent property tax cut from the budget.  Mr. Guthrie suggests that the money citizens would receive doesn’t amount to a hill—or even a can—of beans.  Instead of using beans as a measuring stick, I prefer gasoline.

This property tax cut would be enough money to provide my family of 5 with enough gas for almost an entire two days.  Not quite, but almost.  That’s 2 days—almost—of gas, versus a sizeable investment in our schools or rainy day fund.   I’ll leave it to wiser minds to determine which is more advisable.