Taxes and Spending

Government officials at all levels have insatiable appetites for your tax money.  They claim they just do not have enough of it and the only solution is to take more through higher taxes and fees.  Spending less and forcing government to live within its means, as you and I have to do, is just not an option to them.  Any suggestions regarding limiting spending or even the rate of growth in spending will invariably draw criticism from them.  They will claim the budget won't allow it.  Have you ever noticed that they are completely unconcerned about your budget?

I believe the budgets of most government agencies are bloated and could easily withstand some trimming without ever endangering the legitimate functions the agency is supposed to perform.  I know from experience that government departments with budget money left at the end of the fiscal year go on spending sprees to use it up so that next year's budget will meet or exceed the current year's allocation.  They simply will not allow their department to be viewed as having an excess of funds (money left unspent) and risk getting less the following year.  This is done without regard to whether they have a real need for the money.   The problem is compounded every year as government budgets get fatter and fatter.  They refuse to do with less and are quite unconcerned when you have to.

A recent open records request revealed that our city's latest budget contains two items that together represent $4.8 million reserved for nonexistent departments and employees.  That's a lot of money!  It represents over 20% of all of the property taxes collected for the entire city for the year.  It's not being used for streets or parks or anything in particular.  The majority of it is used for "sundries".  Similar amounts were budgeted the last two years which yields a running total of over $15 million.  When the city was asked for information about this budget item, they were silent.  The questions remain unanswered.

Let's compare this one budget item to something else.  Last year, the city adamantly opposed the Senior and Disabled Tax Freeze on the grounds that it was just too expensive.  The city believed that those on fixed incomes could survive with less money as their home valuations and taxes escalated higher and higher.  The city, of course, could not do with less.  To show how much money the city stood to lose by implementing the freeze, they did a six year projection to make the number look really big.   The city's forecast (and I believe the numbers are inflated) said the cumulative total cost of the freeze over 6 years would be $895,000.  That's a tiny fraction of the $4.8 million that will be spent just this year on mystery departments and sundries.  It appears that we don't have to worry too much about the cost of the freeze after all.  Six years worth amounts to nothing more than petty cash.

If this is representative of the rest of our city's budget, I have to assume there are other areas that warrant some scrutiny.  Unfortunately, that scrutiny has not and will not come from the incumbents in this year's election.  They do not question what is put before them, they simply vote for it and move on.  They should be asking questions and providing oversight for the nearly $80 million spent each year to make sure that it is spent properly.  That is part of their job.  If it were not, they would not have to vote for it to be implemented. 

Finally, when it comes to any discussion of budgets and spending reductions, most cities threaten to cut services and/or the pay and benefits of city employees.  They do this because they know the threat works.  Most citizens and city employees take the threat at face value.  It takes hard work to find the truth and nobody wants the library to close or for their paycheck to get smaller.   The fact is that neither of these have to happen as a result of responsible budget cuts.  Such cuts are taken from excessive spending not necessary spending.

Ask yourself these questions when considering any governmental budget item or spending initiative:

If you ask and answer these questions honestly, I'll bet that you will come up with the right answer more often than they will.  You should monitor your government's spending because they are paying the bills with your wallet.

www.kerrywest.org © 2005