Well, it’s the middle of the summer – we’re a long ways off from budget season – but in the open thread below Steve has posted a link to a Roanoke Times editorial about some budgetary slight-of-hand that the General Assembly pulled during it’s last session.
There is what they call a “Line of Duty Death Benefit” for Public Safety folks. The name
explains the function. It was created by the General Assembly in the 70’s to provide life insurance for Public Safety personnel who were killed in the line of duty. It was later expanded to provide health care for life to Public Safety personnel who were hurt on the job – and their families. I’m sure that the second benefit was heavily lobbied for and, at the time, seemed reasonable.
Well, you can imagine what has happened to the cost of that benefit since the addition of healthcare. Unfortunately, as all too often happens, the General Assembly cannot now summon the fortitude to pay for the program as the cost projections go up and up and up in the next few years. So they did the next best thing – they sent the invoice to localities! The state has notified the City that we will have to pay for this in the current budget year but hasn’t told us how much it will be. Gives you some idea of the planning and execution of this thing.
Let me be clear; I’ve got no beef with this program. People that run into burning buildings and catch bad guys need to know that their fellow citizens have their back – and I’m prepared to vote to say that the City does just that. However, it seems a pity that the GA set an important policy precedent based on simple dogmatic stances when that stance is as hollow as a fallen log. Kicking the can down the road shouldn’t count as “governance” anymore. Also don’t forget that primary among many of our local legislators priorities is the elimination of local taxes – centralizing revenue generation in the property tax which is mainly residential……happy summer!
July 8, 2011 at 11:40 am
Yeah, the commonwealth gets to be the good guy by creating the program but the locality gets to be the bad guy if local funding becomes a probrem. I just love how the allegedly commonwealth saves us money (i.e. lowers the state budget) by shifting who pays. Shameful. Good catch, Andy. Steve too.
July 9, 2011 at 10:32 pm
now, now…don’t confuse with passing mandates without dedicated funding streams with those two evil taxes the GA wants to eliminate. You know if they are not eliminated, Virginia will not be able to maintain all the garlands we have received for being a great place for business – as reported by all those various entities that run the rankings for the last seven months. Wait…the Commonwealth is a great place to do biz even with M&T and BPOL!
July 10, 2011 at 8:53 am
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/292508
FYI: The Dillon Rule rules – again.
July 11, 2011 at 8:39 am
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/292053
Predict the largest tax (utility fee?) increase may arise from
the need to meet new Federal and State regulations on
stormwater management in the next few years.
July 11, 2011 at 9:59 am
Steve, the article on stormwater is an interesting one as it brings to mind a small “paradox” in our own City Code. There are two references to when a person washes their car – in one section, it says you can wash your car in public streets with no control of the run-off…..in another section, it says when washing your car, you have to control the run off. One of those little quirky things in our Code.
At least the City has a three-year head start in thinking how to deal with the new mandates.
July 11, 2011 at 10:02 am
The Dillon Rule – ya know, for something written back about 1873, it sure does like to increase gov’t costs vs. encouraging responsibilities by landowners within a Municipal Corporation. By the way, if anyone is looking for Judge Dillon’s book, it is free for download over at Google Books. I went an pulled it a couple of years back since everybody talks about the Rule, but had no idea what the heck it entailed.
July 16, 2011 at 2:49 pm
http://www.vaco.org/LegislativeNews/LetterGovBudgetCuts71511.pdf
“These reductions do nothing more than shift state cost to local taxpayers.”
July 22, 2011 at 6:41 am
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/293684
Richmond continues to stick it to local governments.