|
|
September 3, 2010
|
MACo Legislative InitiativesSee details below on MACo's 2010 Legislative Initiatives, including:
Visit this page during the Legislative Session to read the progress being made on MACo's Legislative Initiatives. Staff will be posting links to this page from the MACo Blog Conduit Street, on a regular basis. If you have questions about an initiative bill, or any bill that affects county government (not including local bills), please contact the MACo Staff member assigned to that bill. There is a staff member assigned to every bill that MACo is following during Session. They are noted in all the bill lists in the Legislative Affairs section. County Budget SecuritySummary: In light of revenue trends and instability, the State faces a continuing challenge to its multi-year financing of public services, and will be seeking to reduce long-term costs. Some have advocated a shift of funding requirements to counties for any number of shared responsibilities in education, public safety, public health, and elsewhere– a massive cost shift that could burden county budgets and taxes tremendously. MACo urges State policymakers to act responsibly in managing their own expenditure pressures, and not to “send the problem downhill” in a shift of responsibilities to county officials. See the FY 2011 State Budget Documents chart for specific details on County Government impact. School Construction and Renovation FundingSummary: While the State has laudably increased its school construction and renovation efforts in recent years, the need for funding remains high. Every state dollar invested in school projects leverages roughly two county dollars of local funding. MACo urges the General Assembly to continue its commitment by keeping school construction and renovation funding a high priority, and support a funding level consistent with its own adopted multi-year goals. School Budget Accountability - MOE ReformSummary: Facing deep State budget cuts and declining local revenues, many counties contemplated waivers from the State Maintenance of Effort law. Three counties who actually pursued the waiver through the State Board of Education were all rejected, with several disturbing rationale cited by the State Board. The current waiver process suggests an avenue for consideration of county budget difficulties, but the adjudication by the State Board (a body charged with advocating for public education, and without any expertise in government budgets or financing) may leave counties without meaningful redress in times of fiscal crisis. Legislation could eliminate, or replace, the current waiver system with a clearer and fairer process for evaluating county hardships in waiver requests. Visit our Research Section for background and archived information on:
RESOURCES
|