Commissioner Rader Digest

Budget (2009)
The county commissioners voted to raise the millage rate (i.e. property tax) to compensate for declining revenues in this economic downturn. I, however, voted against this tax increase because the economic climate suggests this is not the appropriate time to impose further financial hardship on taxpayers, and because this year's budget takes a band-aid approach to what appears to be a long-term decline in revenues.

The county ought to address its budget deficit by making tougher decisions in its spending. The county budget in 2001, Vernon Jones' first year as the county CEO, was $420 million. The county's budget in 2009 is $606 million, which represents a 44 percent increase. In that time span, the Consumer Price Index increased by 23 percent. While every county program has some value to some constituents, the financial reality is the county needs to learn to live within its means, even if it means making the tough decision to eliminate or reduce some programs.

The county instead chose to use a millage rate increase in conjunction with accounting gimmicks to balance this year's budget. For example, one-time stimulus money from the federal government is being used to prop up the county's revenue shortfall, rather than to pay for a one-time project that otherwise would not be funded from its operating budget. In another trick to fund the operating budget, the commissioners are borrowing about $1 million from the county's sanitation funds, which has in the past been used exclusively for sanitation services.

These gimmicks provide the county short-term relief from making substantive changes in the operation of county government. The county is facing the inevitability of the 27th payday, an issue I've discussed in previous commentaries in February and March, and possibly further erosion in its tax base. Preliminary estimates for next year indicate that with the present economic conditions, the county could find itself with a $45 million budget deficit. Increasing the millage rate is not a sustainable policy for the county's long-term economic development.

This summer, county departments will be submitting preliminary budget requests for 2010. The county should use those preliminary requests as a starting point for thoughtful public discussion to shape its spending priorities for the coming year.

Chief Public Safety Officer

There has been an ongoing debate about the merit of having a Chief Public Safety Officer (PSO) to supervise the county's public safety personnel, and to coordinate with other public officials. The majority of county commissioners elected not to fund the position in this year's budget, but that did not stop the CEO from unilaterally hiring someone as Chief PSO. After four months of discussion, the commissioners on June 23 officially rejected the CEO's request to fund the position by transferring money from elsewhere in the existing budget.

I am in favor of having a Chief PSO because that position can help the county attain financial and organizational efficiency. Public safety is the highest expense category in the county's operating budget, accounting for about 55 percent of this year's $606 million budget [The next highest expense category is debt service at nine percent.].

There are overarching administrative functions for the public safety departments such as purchasing, personnel management, and fleet maintenance. A Chief PSO can evaluate the service delivery of these respective departments to determine whether there are redundancies that could be eliminated to achieve cost savings. As an example, the police and fire departments each have their own liaison for fleet maintenance, one of many items that should be evaluated by an independent person with no turf to protect. Animal Control and Code Enforcement personnel also benefit from a Chief PSO that interacts directly with those activities, rather than through the police department bureaucracy.

A Chief PSO can improve coordination between the administration and other county operations that are under the independent supervision of elected officials, including the Sheriff, District Attorney, the Solicitor, and the courts. While these agency heads are directly elected, your tax dollars fund their operations, so seamless case management is essential to ensuring the efficient and fair administration of justice.

Finally, the CEO has chosen to organize his administration using a cabinet of deputies who each are responsible for a group of related agencies. The Chief PSO is part of that model. Because the CEO is responsible to the citizens for the efficiency of the administration, it seems reasonable that he should be able to implement such a system. My standard of evaluation will be his effectiveness and efficiency, not micromanagement of his organizational chart.

Library Business

I love the county libraries! Not only are they a great amenity, but libraries are a tangible public resource that benefit a broad spectrum of citizens. Recently, county commissioners attended the dedication of two renovated library branches in District Two and approved appointments to the county public library board. The two dedications were at the Northlake-Barbara Loar branch and the Toco Hill-Avis G. Williams branch. Funding for those renovations came from a voter-approved bond in 2005 that designated roughly $54 million for multiple capital projects in the county library system.

While the county can take pride in newly refurbished library branches, it should acknowledge that all physical structures have a finite shelf life. That money will be required to maintain and, possibly replace, these library facilities in the long term. Now is a good time to start setting aside some money in a dedicated account for capital maintenance in the library system.

Unfortunately, this year's budget reallocates money intended for capital expenditures and uses it instead for the library's annual operating expenses. The acquisition of books, as an example, is an annual, operating expense for the library system, yet is being funded this year by money originally intended for one-time, major capital expenses. This is another example of sacrificing the long term for the short term.

Merit System

The commissioners have taken the first step to revise the county merit system, which would remove merit protection from the police chief's position. Doing so would provide the county CEO more flexibility to appoint a police chief of its choosing.

The fire department chief does not have merit protection. The organizational act, which can only be modified by the state senate, provides merit protection to the county directors of finance, human resources and planning.

Merit protection is a cumbersome means to protect the police chief's integrity, but there is a reasonable argument to be made for protecting the chief from undue political pressure. A better mechanism is negotiated contractual provisions to avoid feeling vulnerable to political pressure. Both the county's Executive Assistant and BOC Chief of Staff have such protections in their contracts, so a model exists for achieving this goal.

The change was approved at the June 23 Board of Commissioners (BOC) meeting and will become official with a second affirmative vote, scheduled to take place at the July 14 BOC meeting.

Senior Centers

The county has committed to building three new senior centers to replace existing ones --North DeKalb Senior Center (30319), South DeKalb Senior Center (30032), and Mack Love Senior Center (30329). To help fund construction, the county commissioners approved a $14 million loan from the federal government's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) department.

The loan will be paid back with future payments from the federal government's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). The CDBG is an annual grant, administered by HUD, that DeKalb County receives, based on a federal formula, to fund capital projects serving target populations, including seniors. In recent years, the CDBG grant for DeKalb County has been about $5 to $8 million a year. The closing costs on this loan are minimal and the interest rate is superior to what the county could obtain in the private market.

Best of all, no future tax revenues were sacrificed to obtain this financing. This contrasts the county's attempt, which I rejected, to finance an arts center construction by issuing a bond that would use taxpayers' money without public approval.

The Mack Love Senior Center, in Mason Mill Park, is one of the beneficiaries of the HUD/CDBG funding because Commissioner Kathie Gannon (Super District 6) and I worked with others last summer to include it in the county's consolidated plan, a blueprint for spending future CDBG funds.