Where would you cut county spending?
AS EXPECTED, the proposal by Barrow County Board of Commissioners Chairman Danny Yearwood to hike taxes has been met with howls of protest. Yearwood has been demonized in blogs over the idea.
But this is not a Yearwood-only issue and no matter how you feel about his leadership, the financial issues are bigger than any one person.
The key problem is that during the boom years, county leaders created debt and a fiscal structure that was not sustainable during an economic downturn.
Part of what Yearwood proposed was to levy a new tax to pay for that debt. (Some have confused this with the county’s recent SPLOST renewal, which is to pay for the county’s other debts involving the new courthouse and jail. But those projects were approved by voters and aren’t involved in this discussion.)
The county has already been postponing its non-SPLOST debt service via refinancing and it cannot forever do that. And in all fairness, Yearwood was not responsible for this debt, but his administration is stuck paying for it.
In addition to the debt service the county faces, it also faces a shortage of funds for its ongoing operations. Part of that is due to rising costs for insurance, fuel, etc. Another part is due to declining property tax revenues because of the housing bust. As property values drop, the digest shrinks and the amount of money the county gets declines.
That’s why Yearwood also proposed additional taxes to cover those ongoing costs. Without additional revenue, more cuts will have to be made to county operations.
The problem is, nobody wants to make more cuts. The county has already made some significant cuts over the past two years, cuts that Yearwood and his board got a lot of criticism for doing. The public’s appetite for more cutbacks seems to be thin.
Most of the cost in government is payroll. Unless salaries and benefits are cut, or people are laid off, there can be no significant cost savings in government. Tweaking other smaller expenses simply aren’t enough to fill in the gap.
Governments have made this difficult on themselves, though, because of years of bad decision-making. Government staffs have traditionally been bloated. Pay and benefits have been far above the private sector rates. Perks have been too much.
The public has noticed that. They notice when they go into a government office and one person is working and three others are sitting around having a personal conversation. They notice when government officials drive fancy cars paid for by taxpayers. They notice when they hear the salary and benefits many government employees get compared to the private sector.
So although governments are now starting to do some cutbacks, the public has lost faith that their tax money is being managed correctly. That’s why Yearwood gets so much flak for proposing a tax hike; the public still thinks he should cutback some more, but not cut people.
But those options are very limited. To make the kinds of financial cuts it would take to keep the Barrow County tax rate the same and pay the debt service and other county expenses, it would mean making significant cuts in public safety; that is, laying off firemen, EMS and sheriff’s deputies.
That’s probably not going to happen. For one thing, the county’s ability to cut public safety is limited since the sheriff’s office is a state constitutional position. Although the county BOC does set the budget, they cannot severely limit a sheriff’s office through budget cuts. The courts would probably not support deep cuts to any constitutional office, including the BCSO.
But beyond the legal issues, Barrow County citizens don’t appear to support significant cuts to public safety. The county has a serious crime problem — drug abuse, family violence, property thefts — if anything, people would probably support dedicating more resources toward combating those problems, not less.
Ditto for EMS, fire protection and the judicial system. There is little public appetite for cutting any of those things
Admittedly, Yearwood has created a public persona that makes it easy to blame him for all the county’s ills.
But he didn’t create the economic crisis that has cut property values and he didn’t create the county’s debt.
So Yearwood is now proposing to hike taxes 2-4 mills for next year’s budget. He knows making significant cuts is impossible without a major public backlash; but a tax hike plan also brings a major public backlash.
It almost makes one feel sorry, if not for Yearwood, then at least for the dilemma he and the BOC faces. They have no good options: they have to either raise taxes, or make some very unpopular cuts. They’ll catch heck either way.
So I’m curious what taxpayers would be willing to cut in the county budget to avoid any kind of tax hike. The total of all cuts has to total around $3 million to avoid a tax increase.
If you have some ideas about how to cut $3 million, email me at the address below.
How would you set the county’s spending priorities and where do you think Yearwood and the BOC should make further spending cuts?
Mike Buffington is co-publisher of the Barrow Journal. He can be reached at mike@mainstreetnews.com.
The key problem is that during the boom years, county leaders created debt and a fiscal structure that was not sustainable during an economic downturn.
Part of what Yearwood proposed was to levy a new tax to pay for that debt. (Some have confused this with the county’s recent SPLOST renewal, which is to pay for the county’s other debts involving the new courthouse and jail. But those projects were approved by voters and aren’t involved in this discussion.)
The county has already been postponing its non-SPLOST debt service via refinancing and it cannot forever do that. And in all fairness, Yearwood was not responsible for this debt, but his administration is stuck paying for it.
In addition to the debt service the county faces, it also faces a shortage of funds for its ongoing operations. Part of that is due to rising costs for insurance, fuel, etc. Another part is due to declining property tax revenues because of the housing bust. As property values drop, the digest shrinks and the amount of money the county gets declines.
That’s why Yearwood also proposed additional taxes to cover those ongoing costs. Without additional revenue, more cuts will have to be made to county operations.
The problem is, nobody wants to make more cuts. The county has already made some significant cuts over the past two years, cuts that Yearwood and his board got a lot of criticism for doing. The public’s appetite for more cutbacks seems to be thin.
Most of the cost in government is payroll. Unless salaries and benefits are cut, or people are laid off, there can be no significant cost savings in government. Tweaking other smaller expenses simply aren’t enough to fill in the gap.
Governments have made this difficult on themselves, though, because of years of bad decision-making. Government staffs have traditionally been bloated. Pay and benefits have been far above the private sector rates. Perks have been too much.
The public has noticed that. They notice when they go into a government office and one person is working and three others are sitting around having a personal conversation. They notice when government officials drive fancy cars paid for by taxpayers. They notice when they hear the salary and benefits many government employees get compared to the private sector.
So although governments are now starting to do some cutbacks, the public has lost faith that their tax money is being managed correctly. That’s why Yearwood gets so much flak for proposing a tax hike; the public still thinks he should cutback some more, but not cut people.
But those options are very limited. To make the kinds of financial cuts it would take to keep the Barrow County tax rate the same and pay the debt service and other county expenses, it would mean making significant cuts in public safety; that is, laying off firemen, EMS and sheriff’s deputies.
That’s probably not going to happen. For one thing, the county’s ability to cut public safety is limited since the sheriff’s office is a state constitutional position. Although the county BOC does set the budget, they cannot severely limit a sheriff’s office through budget cuts. The courts would probably not support deep cuts to any constitutional office, including the BCSO.
But beyond the legal issues, Barrow County citizens don’t appear to support significant cuts to public safety. The county has a serious crime problem — drug abuse, family violence, property thefts — if anything, people would probably support dedicating more resources toward combating those problems, not less.
Ditto for EMS, fire protection and the judicial system. There is little public appetite for cutting any of those things
Admittedly, Yearwood has created a public persona that makes it easy to blame him for all the county’s ills.
But he didn’t create the economic crisis that has cut property values and he didn’t create the county’s debt.
So Yearwood is now proposing to hike taxes 2-4 mills for next year’s budget. He knows making significant cuts is impossible without a major public backlash; but a tax hike plan also brings a major public backlash.
It almost makes one feel sorry, if not for Yearwood, then at least for the dilemma he and the BOC faces. They have no good options: they have to either raise taxes, or make some very unpopular cuts. They’ll catch heck either way.
So I’m curious what taxpayers would be willing to cut in the county budget to avoid any kind of tax hike. The total of all cuts has to total around $3 million to avoid a tax increase.
If you have some ideas about how to cut $3 million, email me at the address below.
How would you set the county’s spending priorities and where do you think Yearwood and the BOC should make further spending cuts?
Mike Buffington is co-publisher of the Barrow Journal. He can be reached at mike@mainstreetnews.com.
Heres one for ya. first- convert all of the county owned vehicles over to natural gas, some expense up front and natural gas aint free but it will save money in the long run and more importantly it will get Barrow County a sense of fuel independance.Second- cut out or privatize all nonessential county servecies bring em back when it is a more convienient time for all. Third- you know even though my property values have declined ,what I pay in property tax has not declined so that tells me of a lot of mismanagement of funding.
Fourth It certainly is Yearwoods fault, the buck stops with whoever is in charge, the last three years could have been managed better with someone who is from barrow County in charge.
I believe that it was Barrow-borners that got $30 million in debt for land and SPLOST debt for your Taj Mahal courthouse. Now stop acting like a yankee and work at fixing the problem instead of looking for who's fault it is.
It does no good to take money out of a departments budget only to add it back later.
Take the county attorney for example. Didn't they just vote to give her an additional $200,000?
Would it not make more sense to settle lawsuits.
Would it not make more sense to have a county manager rather than have the county attorney act as one? I'm sure the position for county manager won't draw a $200,000 + salary.
There are still others ways to cut fat from the budget without sacrificing public safety.
We don't need to provide summer daycare for parents. Parks and recreations can be cut or outsourced.
The library can be cut; hours of operation could be shortened or they could close a few days a week.
There are still a few jobs that could be eliminated or reassigned to part time.
And here we are again... Next year is an election year... for half the board!
Hendrix, Parks and Berry can vote either way. By the time they are up for re-election, people would have forgotten the tax increase and will have moved on to other things to complain about.
Yearwood is a lame duck chairman so it doesn't matter how he votes, even if he runs again, he won't be re-elected.
There are your 4 votes to pass an increase.
I don't see Worley, Elder or Wilburn voting for an increase; I'm sure two of them are still under the delusion, they can win if they run again!
Do you want me to spell it out for you?
Probably not, but I will.
If you settle each and every lawsuit (and by settle, it means the county pays out money to the plaintiff), it will encourage every litigious nut to file multiple bogus claims in the sure & certain belief that the county will roll over and pay out $ to the plaintiff (and his shyster).
So, as a practical matter, the county has to oppose legal actions even if, in the end, they lose or, eventually, settle.
I now return you to your lunatic fantasy world.
More hour$ = more $$$$$
More $$$$ 4 her = higher tax$ for u$
For the good of our county I hope that Mr. Legg runs for the office in 2012, I know thta he could balance the budget and reduce taxes at the same time.
1. Sell the airport property. Who cares about the real estate market. It aint coming back anytime soon. Its a damn shame what this county paid for cow pasture. Thanks Doug. Anyway, something of something is better than nothing of nothing.
2. Cut out ALL county vehicles being driven home. One of the first things to go in the business world.
3. Budget $0. and I mean $0. for stupid lawsuits. We've wasted so much on frivolous crap its ridiculous.
4.collect property tax from all these hotshot builders that left everyone holding the bag. Thats an internal problem though. Collect up front at the time of issuing a permit,then if it sells before a year, refund the difference.
The city or county don't have a problem collecting for a water tap.
5. Combine fire and emergency services where possible with cities of Winder,Auburn,Statham, etc. Why do we need 4 sheriffs cars at a routine traffic stop?
Hire a public works director to teach all these county employees how to do something besides hold a shovel. we seriously don't know how to reroof a building?
7.Use inmate labor to keep parks and rec. streets, highways clean. That idea is probably way too inhumane.
8. Stop footing the bill for things contractors
are supposed to supply. Like red lights at the intersection of 81 and 324 near Home Depot. Remember that one Doug and Co? It just cost us about 300,000 not too long a go.
9. Stop borrowing or delaying. Cut a deal with those owed.
number 2. should be a no brainer, this is something that should have been going on for the last two years, that is has not shows that our elected officials really dont care as much as they say they do.
number 3.you can budget for lawsuites period, but we should not be settleing any either.\4.even better charge these bozos and impact fee 5 times what the property tax would be for siad year, these "developers'" have devasted Barrow county for years.
5.Fire and emergency has been cobined for over 20 years between the county and all cities except for Winder, they still have theier own Fire Dept.It would not make sense though to combine Winder in with the county because of the difference in ISDO ratings it would actually cost the citizens and property owners mopre money than they pay now in taxes.
6.You must have went to school here in barrow county because you forgot that 6 comes between 5 and 7,
7. great idea, they could replace 80 percent of all county employees and whats more, theyprobably already know how to do the job because thats where they worked before they got locked up.
8.good idea
9. stupid idea this would kill our bond rating for the next 100 years,
At least your thinking in the right direction , atre our leaders? obviously not.
Second, I would eliminate all paid holidays for employees and replace them with furlough days. Employees would still get the days off but without pay. Additional and significant savings would come from all of the public safety personnel that must work on holidays and receive double time pay. All 911, jail employees, deputies, fireman, etc would receive straight time pay when working on these holidays instead of the double time pay they get now.
Other options are:
An across the board pay cut for all employees.
Employees covering more of thier insurance cost.
Across the board reduction in retirement benefits.
Eliminate all take home vehicles...ALL vehicles.
Reduce BOC pay by at least 75% and eleminate any retirement or insurance benefits they may have.
The county attorney position needs to be reviewed, cutting this cost at least in half is a must.
We have a great young Sheriff but he needs to stop making his men/employees happy and start respecting the needs of the taxpayer. If the Sheriff can't cut 12% to 18% out of his budget he isn't even trying to be cost effective.
Combine and consolidate as many administrative functions as possible. Every department in our admin. building is staffed for peak demand. Cross train all admin employees to work in other areas to meet the peak demand instead of staffing for peaks.
Use inmate labor to work on our roads, parks, and building maintenance. If our inmates can't do it, contract with Jackson County for inmate labor, they can do it!
It is never easy. I did it at my business as well. Lives are affected. I also took the cut.
But to expect employees to take it again and again is unreasonable. I ve given my 2 cents. There are ways to get it done. #9 aint stupid Jack. My business would love to have money coming in regularly. It may not be the amount I like but Id take it. The JDA was apawn in the airport land acquisition, that way it did not have to go to a vote in the county, which would have clearly failed. The only party responsible for that debacle was the former administration. We must make Barrow attractive to both business and families. I am in the community daily and deal with contractors that work in other counties, all I EVER hear is how inept and hard to deal with our people are. The main reason business wants to come here is the usually are given the proverbial "farm".
The school system sucks. Everything in goveernment is in constant turmoil, what family wants to come here. Target and a new theater wont save us. We better get swallow a little pride and put people in office that want to be accountable.
Now there are certainly many business principles that could and should apply but there is one major, huge difference. A business exists for one reason and one reason only... to make a profit for its owner.A recent poster has it right when he says "if he aint makin money then his business has failed" true.
Government is not in place to make a profit, it provides service in various forms. Some of the services it provides could be done as good or better by a business but that business would be contracted by the govt and it would have to make money for its owners or why would they have the business ?
Government should be required to balance its budget on all levels, that is it should not spend more than it takes in, unless the people under that givt. get together and vote to borrow money so they can buy or build something that costs more than said government brings in.Herein lies part of the problem.. the people , that is voters are mostly stupid and clueless when it comes to this sort of thing and they are lead around by slick people who are in a position to make money off of what the govt, does.
So what do we do? first take away the right to vote for people who dont pay into the system in the form of taxes.Oh but that sounds so harsh but these are the people who are damageing the whole system , some people could vote in some elections but not in others. For example if it is a local election and the local govt is funded by the property tax , then only property owners should be allowed to vote in it since they are the only ones who have a stake in it.In a State or Federal election where that govt. is funded by income tax, well then only people who actually have incomes should be allowed to vot in it.
I guess those without jobs and who own no property wouldnt get to vote then and someone might holler discrimination discrimination, let em holler I say, lifes tough.
Ideally they shouldnt be allowed to vote unless they participate in the society . But hey thanks for going out there and defending us and all
Talk of cuts should come when the recovery is in full swing and can sustain them. It's not too far off. Impatient cutting will only hurt at this point.
They had the ground breaking for the new theater recently, and I didn't see many empty storefronts the last time I was at Barrow Crossing. There's a big 160 acre lot around that new theater, and business will move right in to take care of all the foot traffic it'll bring.
Oil prices tanked last week, and pump prices will soon follow. Expect the slide to continue as investors drop oil and rare metals in favor of productive stocks that go up in a recovery.
There have been six ribbon cuttings in the last month here in Barrow: http://www.barrowchamber.com/ribbon_cuttings.htm
Unemployment has been steadily under 10% all year with new jobs and people looking for work again being right around parity.
Your pessimism seems to be unfounded.
People are losing homes from the aftershocks of the recession. People lose homes in the best and worst of times. Jobs are cut as companies make record profits. People steal from others to put food on the table in times of unprecedented global prosperity.
Some people end up as stairs while others climb up, and this will be true no matter how the overall economy is doing. The question is: Do these people at their lowest point have a better shot at making it through their personal crisis now than they would at the worst of the recession?
The answer is yes.