By Steve Garrison
The current Charter blocks any effective long term fiscal reorganization of county government. Real problems need to be fixed and the Charter Amendments will help.
The Council says that they county will be in deficit by $400K this next year, in spite of the levy lid lifts and the recent tax increase. For the following year, they are projecting deficits in the order of $1.1 million. Our total county budget has increased from $30 to $50 million in six years. So far, we have been told that there must be more FTE cuts and more taxes. Where is the leadership for serious fiscal change if an independent county manager is responsible for all operations and administration while the Council itself is limited to governance and policy issues?
Where do the responsibilities of county staff now lie? Is it with the county or state agencies? Staff will take their direction from state agencies if the Council will not lead. The wild track of the CAO has taken with its enormous cost is a good example of this. The current Charter encourages out of control regulation looking for a problem to solve.
Public works appears to be now free to build and expand roads at their discretion as soon as they can shoehorn in 80% – 90% federal or grant funding, regardless of the wishes of the constituencies. The administrator, with capital account money, is allowed to make purchases such as the public employee ferry boat, even if the boat spends most of its life tied to the pier.
The Charter Review Commission’s platform is simple. Stop, downsize, and get your fiscal house in order. Put all voters in charge of all Council positions and the Council in charge of the administration. Vote for the Charter revisions.
Steve Garrison served on the Charter Review Commission’s Finance Sub-committee
Steve,
The Charter revisions would have little or nothing to do with addressing the problems you raise. The Council is currently responsible for the budget to the extent prescribed by law, and is responsible for the performance of the Administrator they hire. If they are not doing their job, then elect new council members who will.
Under the proposed revisions to the Charter individual Council members taking upon themselves the opportunity for detailed daily administrative functions is a sure formula for chaos or gridlock.
The “Platform” you describe in the last sentence does not and will not exist.
Does a single Council member have any legal authority to do anything acting on their own, under our previous system, the current system, or under the proposed new charter?
My understanding was that they can only legally act as a body, and that an individual Council member generally has no power to do anything on her own.
Mr. Garrison’s apparent lack of understanding of divided legislative and administrative governance, and to the extent it reflects upon the Charter Review Committee as a whole, is troubling. Assuming similar incorrect views of roles and responsibilities are held by the CRC membership, this helps to explain the regressive nature reflected in the CRC’s Recommendations 1 and 2.
Equally, there appears to be a lack of understanding of the precedence that Federal and state law has over local laws and how these are to be met by local public employees. Again, a clear understanding of the authority, responsibility and role of County elected officials and County staff is essential to understanding how a county council and county manager should function. Without that clear recognition, the recommendations of the CRC are tainted by misinformation and unsupported personal opinion.
I urge voters to vote NO on the CRC’s Recommendation 1 and Recommendation 2.
Bummer! I was hoping to get beyond John Rios personal attack such as “apparent lack of understanding of divided legislative and administrative governance” and so on. As we both know, there is a built in conflict between the needs of the state and the needs of its citizens. One of the first acts of a new elected Council rep is to swear to uphold the Constitution and the Laws of the State. Then, he sits down with a citizen who is having his or her land and local environment torn apart on a non-porous cliff surface in order to to satisfy a state mandated storm water regulation. How one negotiates between the state and the citizen directly affected by laws not of the Council’s making is a complicated process, and not as easy as simply supporting the law and then going home for the evening.
The County’s current budget problems did not arise as a result of the Charter; the millions spent by the last pre-Charter Commissioners on ill-advised real estate deals and what I recall to be a 10% increase in budget as they departed set the stage for what the Charter Council has been struggling with. No one’s position on the Charter or the CRC recommendations should be based upon the notion that the Charter council members have spent us into this situation. That credit belongs elsewhere.