Economy Watch Live Updates on the Financial Crisis | MORE » | Business Home »

Spending Plan Needs Closer Look, Officials Say

Montgomery to Pass $3.6 Billion Budget

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 26, 2005

Montgomery County Council member Michael Knapp and his colleagues are expected to give final approval today to a new budget. But Knapp would be the first to say he doesn't really know what he's voting on.

"If you kind of go through a lot of documents, you could probably put it together," said Knapp (D-Upcounty). "But there is not a single place that I found that identifies each [county] program and what it is they are trying to accomplish."

Knapp raises a point largely overlooked in the annual budget review: The weeks of intense debate involved a mere fragment of the $3.6 billion plan, about $264 million in new spending proposed by County Executive Douglas M. Duncan (D).

The rest of the established "base budget" -- primarily devoted to schools, public safety and social services -- was never on the table.

According to council members and staff members, the last major reductions to the base budget occurred during the recession of the early 1990s, when employees' cost-of-living raises were suspended and several hundred positions were eliminated.

Members said they are frustrated that their deliberations never really get to the heart of where taxpayers' money goes. But they said that would require a dramatically expanded budget process.

"We would need twice as much staff and twice as much time to deal with the base," said Steven A. Silverman (D-At Large). "The budget process is biased in favor of anybody who has been lucky enough to get in the budget already."

The result, council members and some community activists said, is a budget debate that hasn't caught up with the county's changing demographics. Programs designed to serve the county's population of the 1980s and 1990s survive largely unscathed, while those designed to respond to the needs of emerging communities face long odds.

"I don't think Montgomery County is looking at the long term. They are not thinking visionary," said Pilar Torres, executive director of Centro Familia, which promotes early child care and education for immigrants.

About 52 percent of Montgomery's budget goes to schools, and 36 percent funds county government, including health and human services, police, fire and public works. Montgomery College receives 5 percent of taxpayers' money, while reserve funds and the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission each get about 3 percent.

About $8 of every $10 goes toward payroll and retirement costs for employees.

Even some of the $264 million proposed by Duncan was already obligated. Fixed costs, such as labor contracts, meant that council members were arguing over about $100 million, a portion of which they wanted to return to homeowners in the form of property tax rate reductions.


CONTINUED     1        >


© 2005 The Washington Post Company