Growls

Following the budget hearing on Tuesday evening that drew about 70 residents, last evening’s tax rate hearing “drew its usual smaller crowd,” according to Scott McCaffrey’s online report at the Arlington Sun Gazette. McCaffrey further introduced his article by writing:

“Speakers were split between those who want the County Board to raise the real estate tax rate 1 cent (to 96.8 cents per $100 assessed value) and those who said the government should find efficiencies and lower the rate.

“There is no rate increase necessary,” said Wayne Kubicki, a veteran budget-watcher who has served on the government’s Fiscal Affairs Advisory Commission.”

Mr. Kubicki was kind enough to provide me his testimony for Growls. His testimony follows:

"Mr. Chairman, good evening.

"The Manager’s proposed budget for FY12 is in fine shape.  It is balanced at the current tax rate.  It complies with your budget guidance.  No rate increase is necessary.

"If you’d like some additional revenue to spend, I have an extra $1.2M for you:

• As you heard in your CPHD work session, permit fees there are understated by $200K.
• The mid-year FY11 report, released a week ago, shows projected FY11 revenues for personal property, utility, meals & car rental taxes at a combined $1M higher than budgeted for FY12. Moving up the FY12 amounts to match would seem sensible.

"If you need a budget reduction, look at your vacant yet still funded FTEs.  There are currently 141 full-time ones.  7 of them have been vacant for over 18 months.  29 have been vacant for over 10 months – if you eliminated just 14 of these, you’d save over $1.3M.

"The hole in the Sheriff’s Department budget can be plugged with the excess full-year funding for Mary Marshall & Long Bridge Park sitting in Non-Departmental.

"Mix all this into any increases in real estate assessments over & above the budget book, and FY12 should be just fine, thank you.

"But that does NOT mean you should approve the current 95.8 cent rate.

"Let’s go back to that mid-year report.  Including FEMA’s reimbursement for the 2010 storms, it shows a FY11 surplus over $22M.

"Put another way, last year’s tax rate could have been over 4 cents lower, and FY11 would still balance.

"Paraphrasing a line from current culture, last year’s tax rate was just too darn high.

"It’d would be unconscionable for you to have raised the rate 8 cents last year, in the middle of a recession, increasing the average residential bill by $270, have that tax increase result in a $22M surplus – and then keep the money and spend it on who knows what.

"You usually use surpluses like this for so-called “one-time spending.”  This year, it’s time for some “one-time tax relief."

"Three of you may well be on the ballot this fall.  Consider the voter appeal – you could campaign saying, “Yes, I raised taxes – I created a surplus – but I gave it back to you.”  Sounds great, no?

"If you like, use some of the surplus on-time injections into things like AHIF, or a down-payment on rebuilding Lubber Run or establishing a year-round homeless shelter.  Combined, say, $5M.

"That would leave over $17M for rate relief.  Since a reduction would affect three tax payments, you could give one-time tax relief of around 2 cents – because, after all, last year’s tax rate was just too darn high.  Thank you for your time this evening."

I will post the ACTA president’s testimony here tomorrow.

You can watch the March 22 budget and March 24 tax rate hearings at the County Board webpage.