NWA EDITORIAL: Don't ask, don't tell?

County leaders should answer all budgetary questions

Once a year, the quorum court in each county takes a vote that fulfills its primary reasons for existing. That's the adoption of a budget that outlines how the county will spend taxpayer dollars for the upcoming year.

In Washington County, that hasn't always been a smooth process. Then again, it's not really designed to be easy and comfortable for the people who ask voters to put them in positions of authority and pay them pretty good salaries to do it. The budgetary process for any organization can be a struggle, as different ideas compete for the limited dollars available. Creating a budget in a public venue is not without its challenges.

What’s the point?

The Washington County Quorum Court should respect all its members’ questions about budgets and spending before it passing annual spending authority for elected department heads.

But that's the job, and it involves millions of dollars.

Bill Ussery, chairman for Washington County's Finance and Budget Committee, set out this year with a goal to avoid some of the contentious discussions between members of the Quorum Court and the county's elected department heads or their staffs. In past years, he said, the process has demeaned department heads and the county hasn't ended up saving any money in the process.

His leadership this time around was designed to put trust in department heads, whether it's the county judge, the sheriff, the assessor or any of the others. When he had questions about budgets, he went to them individually to get answers. He felt good about the results.

Tuesday evening, Justice of the Peace Eva Madison wanted to ask questions, something we've long encouraged county leaders to do when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars. In a meeting of the committee, she said she wanted to ask questions about line item spending plans within County Judge Joseph Wood's budget for 2019.

Wood had submitted a budget with reductions over this year's budget, and that seemed to satisfy some of the Quorum Court members. Ussery had felt it unnecessary to bring department heads before the committee if they were spending less for 2019.

But Madison had questions, and Tuesday was the last chance to ask them in committee before the budget is considered at tonight's Quorum Court meeting. When she tried to ask them, she was rebuffed.

Carl Gales, Wood's chief of staff, said he was unprepared for the unexpected questions and wouldn't answer Madison's questions. Ussery, who said Wednesday he was surprised by Madison's end-of-meeting request to question the county judge's planned expenditures, instead offered to let Madison email questions.

"I find it shocking we're being asked to approve a budget and we're being denied the opportunity to ask questions," Madison said.

For all concerned, it was a messy and awkward clash. Judge Wood said Wednesday that his office had handled its budget request precisely as requested by Ussery. Thinking the committee had explored all its questions, Wood said, Gales did not prepare to respond to questions Tuesday night.

We hope someone in the county judge's office has taken the time since that meeting to get prepared. Madison should get to answer her questions tonight before any votes are taken. And they should be answered as clearly as Judge Wood, who will preside over tonight's Quorum Court meeting, or his staff has the capacity to respond.

Let's make one thing clear: Wood is a Republican, just elected to his second term, and Madison is a Democrat. It would surprise no one that the interchange between Madison and Wood's office might be viewed through a political lens. We can't get into Madison's head, but that's a possibility. That said, she has been known to pepper department heads with tough question for a long time. Yes, even when a Democrat sat in the county judge's seat. "It's the way I've done it since I've been on the court," Madison said Wednesday.

Ussery's operation of Washington County's Finance and Budget Committee this year -- his first year as chairman -- has been less contentious. But in part that's because it's been completed with more one-on-one conversations and fewer budget meetings in which issues are hashed out in public. We're sure that's just fine with elected department heads, who don't want to get raked over the coals in public, but if there's any issue that deserves to fully play out in public, it's the allocation of taxpayer dollars to county services. People should be able to hear what their justices of the peace have concerns about. They should be able to evaluate whether their elected leaders are conducting themselves with due diligence and responsibility.

And members of the Quorum Court should be able to get answers to their questions in a public venue. Elected officials who have confidence in their budgets should not skirt answer any and all questions. The idea that a chief of staff isn't prepared to even entertain questions is ludicrous.

Ussery is a nice guy. Conducting county business without conflict probably sounds like a worthy goal to him. But the establishment of an annual budget ought to always include robust discussion about priorities and spending. That's how the public learns about its government and its leaders.

Is that what people are afraid of?

It's a fine thing to talk about transparency in government, but it's the everyday application of transparent practices that determine whether government is operating out in the open.

The 15 members of the Quorum Court are all elected by the voters of their districts to do a job. It ought to be professional courtesy that they respect each other's desire to ask questions and get answers from the full-time elected officials who run the county. Even if there's a political motivation -- maybe there was in this case, and maybe there wasn't -- that just has to be faced. The best way to deflect tough questions and to overcome distrust, if it exists, is to have good answers.

Ussery said Wednesday that the other justices of the peace at Tuesday's meeting seemed satisfied with the budget. That's fine. But Washington County over the years has had examples of misallocation or of money set aside for one thing used for something else. County taxpayers deserve a Quorum Court that plays the watchdog role even while working as cooperatively as possible with administrators to make the county work effectively.

Any member of the Quorum Court seeking answers about the spending of taxpayer dollars is doing his or her job. Any county official who stands as a barrier to those answers is not.

We hope that tonight, before any movement toward adopting a budget happens, the members of the Quorum Court will let any of its members explore budgetary questions with the county leaders who get the authority to spend the money.

That's the job, whether one is prepared for it or not.

Commentary on 11/15/2018

Upcoming Events