May 9, 2008
|
|
|
May 9, 2008
|
Major Issues Summary
2008 Legislative InitiativesFour initiatives are planned for the 2008 General Assembly Session: County Budget Security, School Construction and Renovation Funding, Post Employment Benefit Funding Options, and Traffic Speed Monitoring Technology. They are described below: County Budget Security - The State government, by all accounts, faces a substantial structural fiscal imbalance, with forecasts envisioning an approaching imbalance of over one billion dollars. Reducing “local aid” to solve the State’s budget woes amounts to an unfair shift of burden - balancing the state budget on the backs of local tax increases, past and future. The State should maintain its commitments to public education, and to its modest share of costs for programs like police protection, local health departments, and targeted grant programs. Where state support has been abridged, a plan to reinstate appropriate support should be established. March 26 . . . View a summary of Direct Local Effects of the FY 2009 State Budget Plans here. February 18 . . . MACo has again adopted “County Budget Security” as a priority for the 2008 session. The proposed FY 2009 State budget does not include dramatic cuts to county distributions, but counties have been raising several budget-related issues before the General Assembly: * Local Health Departments have been “squeezed” in recent years by State salary and benefit costs, and in FY 2009, the State’s proposed billing for future retiree health care costs exacerbate this challenge – personnel costs in local health departments are projected to rise some $25 million in FY 2009. * The State has included in its proposed budget the beginning of a multi-year investment of $42 million for new optical scan voting machines – with one half these funds to be obtained through invoices to county governments. School Construction & Renovation Funding - The State has pledged an eight-year commitment to fund the wide-ranging school construction and renovation needs inventoried in the School Facilities Act of 2004. However, rapidly escalating construction costs and an increasing student population continue to make the funding for these needed projects a challenge. Recently, the State has laudably increased its school construction and renovation funding and the counties have responded by providing their significant share of funding for local projects. But seeing these needed projects to completion requires a continued commitment. MACo urges the General Assembly to continue to make school construction and renovation funding a high priority through the duration of the School Facilities Act commitment. February 13 - MACo President Jim Smith and 15 other county elected officials held a press conference to urge the General Assembly to support Governor O'Malley's $333 million request. January 17 - Governor Martin O'Malley announced that he would include $333 million in school construction and renovation funding in his FY 2009 capital budget. Post-Employment Benefit Funding Options - With new GASB accounting rules requiring greater disclosure of long-term employee obligations (such as retiree health benefits and other post-employment benefits), governments are approaching this monumental fiscal challenge in a variety of ways. State law currently authorizes limited methods of use and investment of public funds - counties seek broader statutory authority to engage in some joint investment of their funding for these long-term purposes. Additionally, counties seek authority to ensure that county funding for related long-term liabilities for public school employees are properly accommodated within the funding structure for public schools. February 18 . . . Legislation is in drafting to authorize local governments to jointly invest funds toward post-employment benefit obligations, either across governments or with a third party. The bill had not yet been introduced. Traffic Speed Monitoring Technology - Enforcement Authority - Maryland’s use of traffic signal monitoring technology has been shown to reduce violations, accidents, and injuries at affected intersections. Similar technology in limited use in deterring speed violations on public roadways, with a goal of reducing dangerous speed violations, reducing accidents and injuries. Similar protections for special vehicle classes and/or non-owner operation may be implemented to recognize the nature of the enforcement technology. The State should authorize local governments to implement speed monitoring cameras, and issue civil citations to vehicle owners for registered violations. March 6 - The Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee gave SB 269 a report of favorable with amendments. The amendments decreased the maximum fine from $75 to $40, increased the speed tolerance level (the minimum speed over the posted speed limit when a camera will turn on) from 10 MPH to 12 MPH, and decreased the warning period from 1 year to 5 months. February 19 and 20 - MACo testified with the Administration and MML in support of the speed camera bills before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee and the House Environmental Matters Committee. Law enforcement representatives from Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Howard County, Montgomery County, and the Cities of Gaithersburg, Laurel, and Rockville also testified in support of the bill. February 18 - Cross-filed bills, HB 364 and SB 269 were introduced by the Administration, to provide local option authority for counties, and to provide camera authority on highway work zones. The hearings were February 19 (SB 269) and February 20 (HB 364). January 15 - MACo and MML law enforcement and community representatives testified at a briefing before the House Environmental Matters Committee on the importance and impact of speed cameras. Representatives from Baltimore City, Harford, Howard, and Montgomery Counties and the City of Hyattsville were present. They stressed that if implemented propoerly, speed cameras would increase the safety of drivers, pedestrians, and law enforcement personnel. Secretary of Transportation John Porcari and State Highway Administrator Neil Pedersen also testified about using speed cameras in highway work zones. OTHER ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE Local Health Department Billing - In a letter dated March 3, 2008, Governor Martin O'Malley rescinded the planned billing to over $10 million to local health departments for an apportioned share of state post employment benefit costs. Local Health Departments and county officials hd raised substantial concerns that this billing would trigger an increase in personnel costs of more than $25 million over FY 2008, and would likely force substantial layoffs of public health workers. The relief of the post employment benefits charge reduces the substantial split between increased personnel costs and the state formula funding for local health departments' core operations, which increases only about $1.8 million this year. Read the letter sent to Anne Arundel County's health department. February 28 - MACo and MML jointly supported SB 844, subject to amendments that would address four key areas of local government concern. If the four issues could not be addressed to MACo's satisfaction, then MACo would recommend that the bill be committed to summer study. The four areas included: (1) deleting the bill provisions allowing Critical Area Commission to overrule a local government's decision to grant an after-the-fact variance or mapping mistake; (2) defining the Commission's authority to adopt regulations within specific parameters; (3) modifying the factors considered by the Commission when deciding whether to grant a request to use growth allocation; and (4) recognition of the increased funding burdens placed on the counties by the bill. County planners, attorneys, and enforcement personnel also rebutted a Chesapeake Bay Foundation report attacking the counties' variance process. March 6 - MACo and MML jointly testified before the House Environmental Matters Committee in support of HB 1253, stating that the organizations had reached an agreement with the Critical Area Commission on a set of amendments that would address the four key areas of local government concern. MACo's continued support of the bill is contingent upon the adoption of the amendments. MACo consulted with county elected officials, planners, attorneys, and enforcement personnel in the wording of the amendments. Standing for Community and Nonprofit Associations - MACo continues to address the issue of when a community or nonprofit association should have standing to appeal a local government decision in court. Four introduced bills that would impact standing rights in counties: HB 246 (heard February 13), HB 1341 (hearing March 12), SB 596 (hearing March 12), and SB 687 (hearing March 12). MACo negotiated with certain associations in an attempt to reach a compromise on the issue, but was unsuccessful. February 13 - MACo testified in opposition to HB 246 before the House Environmental Matters Committee. The bill would expand the standing rights in seven charter counties to include any taxpayer. Homestead Credit Application – SB 239 and HB 1256 - In 2007, legislation was passed to require homeowners to apply to receive the Homestead Property Tax Credit, in an effort to reduce inaccurate date and fraud within that program. These bills would cease the application program. MACo opposed SB 239 before the Budget and Taxation Committee at its hearing on January 30. The House Bill hearing was February 28. Transfer Tax Authority - HB 1424, a joint effort between MML and MACo, would grant limited transfer tax authority to municipalities and the six jurisdictions who currently do not have it. The rate would not be allowed to exceed 0.5%, and one-half of the revenues from the tax would be required to go to a local special fund to support certain categories of infrastructure. Chesapeake Bay 2010 Trust Fund (aka "Green Fund") - Legislation designed to raise money to address non-point source pollution in the Chesapeake Bay watershed was considered during the 2006/2007 Regular and 2007 Special Sessions. MACo supported this "Green Fund" legislation on the conditions that county revenue sources were protected and a share of the Fund went to local governments for water projects and agricultural preservation. During the Special Session, legislation passed creating the Chesapeake Bay 2010 Trust Fund and identifying $50 million in State-based funding sources. However, companion legislation that would have provided for the administration and distribution of the Fund (HB 23 of 2007 Special Session) did not pass. February 6 - MACo testified before the Senate Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee in support of SB 213 . The bill clarifies the distribution of funds from the Fund and codifies the "BayStat" program. MACo did ask for two amendments. Amendment #1 provides for a 30% minimum funding allocation to local governments, provided that the local government provided a 100% match. Amendment #2 allows local governments to utilize the funds for agricultural preservation purposes. The House Environmental Matters Committee heard cross-filed bill, HB 369 on February 27. January 15 - The Senate Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee held a briefing on the Fund and the health of the Chesapeake Bay. The Secretaries of Agriculture, Environment, Natural Resources, and Planning discussed the importance of identifying and addressing current and future Bay stressors. Natural Resources Secretary John Griffin declared that monies from the Fund should be made available to local governments and non-profit associations in the form of competitive grants. Representatives from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation stressed the need to have the Fund overseen by a data-driven process, such as BayStat. WHO TO CONTACT
© 2007 - Design by WebFirst - Ellen Clarke, Website Manager |
