Be-FUD-dled
The latest last-minute claim of the opponents of legislative success is that we have increased spending in the budget from $71 to $83 million. They claim that this means that we have increased spending by $12 million. In a word: No.
The Administrator, who, for a period of time, our opponents wanted to seize on as the sole reason for legislative success (before deciding that they should deny that there was success!), has done many good things. One of these is to make the county budget more transparent by moving things that had been kept off budget onto the budget, where anyone with an interest could scrutinize them. In the past, they were kept off budget, essentially invisible to the taxpayers who footed the bill. Either way, the spending was there. The Administrator's way, which I wholeheartedly endorse, is a more honest and open way of showing spending.
So what is the real record? Here it is:
There are increases in this year's budget: for the increased cost of the CSEA contract, for the anticipated costs of the reclassifications that will be the result of implementation of the Management study, for retirement benefits, and for health insurance. (As an aside, the magnitude of the increase in health insurance costs is much less, thanks to Scott Steve's initiative in getting the county a new - and better - policy.) We are beginning year one of a long-term infrastructure project (check out the photos here and here if you want to see for yourself why). Some programs costs are more or less dictated to us (e.g., pre-school ed, Medicaid). The total increase in spending is about 1/6 of what our opponents claim. It is on the order of 2.5% of on-budget spending.
So we have made the budget more transparent by putting more expenditures on-budget. The downside is that it makes apples-to-apples comparisons more difficult. As the Administrator states in his budget: "Significant accounting changes were made in 2004, 2005, and 2006 capturing or excluding transactions previously reported off or on the general ledger". Our opponents have the same information, but instead of being honest about it, they are using it to sow discord - and to try to realize political gain.
It's just so much more FUD. Don't believe it.
All Looney Tunes and other commercial graphics are the sole property of their owners. This site is not affiliated with nor endorsed by Warner Brothers or any of its affiliates. Characters and all related slogans and indicia are trademarked. The materials provided herein are intended solely for the personal use and enjoyment of the general public. The use of such material falls under Fair Use Provisions act.
The Administrator, who, for a period of time, our opponents wanted to seize on as the sole reason for legislative success (before deciding that they should deny that there was success!), has done many good things. One of these is to make the county budget more transparent by moving things that had been kept off budget onto the budget, where anyone with an interest could scrutinize them. In the past, they were kept off budget, essentially invisible to the taxpayers who footed the bill. Either way, the spending was there. The Administrator's way, which I wholeheartedly endorse, is a more honest and open way of showing spending.
So what is the real record? Here it is:
YEAR..
.REVENUES.....EXPENSES.....SURPLUS/DEFICIT2001..
64,761,181.. 68,536,165.. 3,774,9842002..
59,226,967.. 59,249,580.. ...22,6132003..
63,608,425.. 61,477,372.. 2,131,0532004..
68,401,898.. 63,502,798.. 4,899,100
There are increases in this year's budget: for the increased cost of the CSEA contract, for the anticipated costs of the reclassifications that will be the result of implementation of the Management study, for retirement benefits, and for health insurance. (As an aside, the magnitude of the increase in health insurance costs is much less, thanks to Scott Steve's initiative in getting the county a new - and better - policy.) We are beginning year one of a long-term infrastructure project (check out the photos here and here if you want to see for yourself why). Some programs costs are more or less dictated to us (e.g., pre-school ed, Medicaid). The total increase in spending is about 1/6 of what our opponents claim. It is on the order of 2.5% of on-budget spending.
So we have made the budget more transparent by putting more expenditures on-budget. The downside is that it makes apples-to-apples comparisons more difficult. As the Administrator states in his budget: "Significant accounting changes were made in 2004, 2005, and 2006 capturing or excluding transactions previously reported off or on the general ledger". Our opponents have the same information, but instead of being honest about it, they are using it to sow discord - and to try to realize political gain.
It's just so much more FUD. Don't believe it.
All Looney Tunes and other commercial graphics are the sole property of their owners. This site is not affiliated with nor endorsed by Warner Brothers or any of its affiliates. Characters and all related slogans and indicia are trademarked. The materials provided herein are intended solely for the personal use and enjoyment of the general public. The use of such material falls under Fair Use Provisions act.
posted by Doc Paul @ 6:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home