Maybe it's no longer viewed as a sincere expression of concern to offer one's "thoughts and prayers." We think the phrase gets a bad rap just because its been adopted by politicians as a substitute for actually doing something about an issue. But, really, we'll always accept someone's thoughts and prayers. It's far better than earning their disinterest.
It's a tempting time to choose disinterest when it comes to the Washington County Quorum Court. It's September, so that means it's time for its 15 members, elected from all over the county, to put their heads together to come to some agreement on how much money the county's departments will be authorized to spend in 2020. For some, that sounds boring as all get out, but it is vitally important to ensure the fiscal health of county government and the effective delivery of services.
What’s the point?
Quorum Court members have their work cut out for them in setting Washington County government on a solid course for the future through annual budgeting.
For years, Quorum Court members have groused and grunted as they tried to fit a square peg into a round hole -- that is, to create an annual budget that doesn't spend more money than the county expects to take in the next year. The Quorum Court hasn't been successful.
Last week, Justice of the Peace Ann Harbison, this year's chairman of the finance/budget committee, declared the county is "in somewhat of a crisis."
"It's time to bring this budget under control," Harbison told her fellow elected officials.
Harrumph, harrumph, to borrow a phrase from Hedley Lamar.
Harbison proposed starting budget discussions with a ban on creating positions (24 have been requested) and no raises for the employees the county already has. That comes just days after the county's salary consultant recommended a 4 percent increase in pay to help Washington County keep pace with what others are paying these days for similar positions.
Mind you, Harbison is a Democrat on a Quorum Court that's split -- eight Republicans, seven Democrats. If we're to believe the conventional political stereotypes, Harbison should be the tax-and-spender while the Republicans would be the ones trying to clamp down on deficit spending.
That's not the way things always pan out. In budget meetings last week, fiscal conservatism seemed to be at the core of Harbison's proposal, which she acknowledged as a "bold" proposal that would make plenty of people unhappy. She's right about that.
She's also right that Washington County, which years ago was flush with so much money on hand the Quorum Court actually cut property taxes, can ill afford to just keep spending more and watching its reserves dwindle. Counties need reserves as a cushion for unforeseen expenses or worsening economic conditions. Anyone remember the ice storm of 2009? Another example is the 2020 census, which is sure to diminish the portion of the countywide sales tax that goes into county government's coffers. If reserves are a rainy day fund, the results of the census are dark clouds on the horizon.
The political split as well as the urban/rural divide on the Quorum Court make budget-building a difficult process. That's amplified in 2019 by the fact that nine of the 15 justices of the peace first took office in January, so this is their first run-through in creating a full year's budget for government services.
If anyone tells you it ought to be easy, they're foolish.
"Necessity is going to force us to do some things we don't want to do," an experienced Republican Justice of the Peace Harvey Bowman advised.
Patrick Deakins, in his rookie year on the Quorum Court, gave his 2 cents worth, speaking to his colleagues: "If the obvious hasn't struck you yet, we're being asked to fix the problem that's been a problem for years before we got here," he said. "Put your boots on, buckle your seat belts, 'cause it's going to be a bumpy ride over the next few months."
He's right. Washington County has struggled every fall with its budget process, in part because of differing philosophies about how much latitude full-time elected officials should have with their spending. That struggle happens, too, because it's clear in watching the justices of the peace that some of them simply don't care for one another, or at least their perspectives. Still, fixing the budget has to start somewhere and sometime. Cans are easy to kick down the road.
That's all part of holding public office. What the public expects is for elected leaders to put their personality differences aside and find collaborative ways to (1) allocate limited funds, (2) put county government's finances on a solid financial footing for the future and (3) ensure full-time elected officials are held accountable for appropriate use of taxpayer dollars.
That includes making sure large sums allocated for specific reasons aren't used for alternative purposes without publicly revisiting whether the spending is appropriate. That includes not tucking surprise pay raises for some officials in the budget, something Harbison promised she would not allow. That includes making sure the county judge's claim that he's submitted a smaller budget over last year is evaluated against his transfer of a $145,000 function of his office to another officeholder.
Let no one be under an impression that the task before these justices of the peace is easy. Budgeting is difficult when 15 people sit around the table trying to hash it out. So, yes, our thoughts and prayers go out to them. But this is perhaps the most important function the Quorum Court takes up every year. The job they do either protects taxpayers and the resources they pay in for the county's use, or it allows room for inefficiency at best and abuse at worst.
Whether an all-out ban on new positions is merited is beyond our ability to evaluate, but we suspect Harbison is closer to correct than she is to being wrong. Spending, eventually, needs to be brought under control, and that means saying no.
So, yes, the bumpy ride is just getting started.
Commentary on 09/18/2019