The BCC and ECSO recently agreed to a 3 1/2 -year, $9.1 Million dollar settlement--and we are working to implement that agreement even though the ECSO has unilaterally balked at it after agreeing in writing to it back on March 9th.
But because there have been lots of discussions about budgets--I asked for some specific budget documents from staff-- I asked staff for data that will clearly illustrate why this $9.1 Million dollar settlement is generous, fair, and represents (if implemented) a 4.39% year over year increase for the ECSO year over year for four years.
Everyone I have talked to was relieved that the nightmare budget battle was finally coming to an end. Better yet--this deal would extend for several years so everyone could plan and there would be no more fighting, bickering, posturing, and name-calling year after year.
But now that the ECSO are furiously trying to back out of the deal and walk away from their written agreement, some people are talking about the "fairness" of the budgets over time, over the last 11 years. So lets talk about that.
Who has had it worse over the past 11 years in terms of year over year budget growth? Take a look at this chart, below.
Contrast this with the County's Adopted Budget over the same time period: In 2007, it was $458,839,188. Fast forward 11 years to 2017-2018 budget, and we are at $455,840,072--not even where we were 11 years ago! Annualized, it represents .00653 below where we were in 2007 --a negative number even after 11 years!
Looking at the county's general fund--the outlook is only slightly better: In 2007 the county's general
fund was $205,790,874. Fast forward to eleven years later, and it has only increased to $208,113,702-- up just $2,322,828 total in 11 years-or an anemic 1.1% total increase in this timeframe OR .1% per year for the 11 year period.
So looking at who has fared worse over this time frame in terms of budget increases year over year--It is crystal clear: the county has had it far worse....And the county has had to endure the same issues the ECSO has had with respect to rising costs of labor, health care, FRS contributions, salary compression etc. etc. etc. We have also experienced difficulty recruiting and holding on to good employees. So just looking at numbers it is readily apparent that the County and not the ECSO has had it worse--- how can anyone dispute what is so patently obvious?
1 comment:
But Sir David came into power in 2008 (remember the interview on his election night where he said, "who's the ultimate insider now," which was really sinister) and he needs more money because, well because he says he does. So do what the D2 Commish does: obey your master Morgan.
Post a Comment