|
Youngstown Vindicator…
Budget director
questioned
Thu, March 17, 2011
By Marc Kovac
COLUMBUS - Democrats in the Ohio House questioned Gov. John Kasich’s
budget director Wednesday about the impact of funding cuts to schools
and local governments under his proposed two-year, $55 billion-plus
spending plan.
The first day of hearings before the House’s Finance Committee provided
a snapshot of the debate to come over a biennial budget that includes a
mix of law changes, program reforms and spending cuts aimed at filling
an $8 billion budget deficit.
“I know you refer to it as the jobs budget,” said Rep. Matt Lundy, a
Democrat from Elyria. “I see it more as the jobs buster. We’re talking
about local government funds getting cut 50 percent, which would have a
negative impact on police and fire, cuts in education that would impact
teaching.”
But Tim Keen, head of the state’s Office of Budget and Management,
countered, “If you believe that government is the way for Ohio to grow
our way to prosperity, then perhaps you need to have some concerns. If
you believe that free markets and allocation of resources to help
businesses grow, then this is a bill that you should support.”
Keen was the first committee witness on House Bill 153, legislation
that will outline state spending over the next two fiscal years. His
testimony kicked off legislative proceedings on the budget that likely
will stretch into late June.
Kasich’s executive budget includes general revenue fund appropriations
of $26.9 billion in the first year and $28.6 billion in the second,
increases of 1.1 percent and 6.4 percent compared with year-earlier
spending.
The budget secures income-tax cuts that were postponed by the previous
administration, allows for the use of state liquor profits to fund
economic development through the new JobsOhio nonprofit, calls for
increased funding of in-home senior care and other reforms to Medicaid
programming, and proposes the sale of five state-prison facilities.
The administration has not yet released spreadsheets showing how
individual school districts, universities or local governments would
fare under the budget proposal.
Keen said direct state formula funding for school districts would
increase 2 percent and 1.5 percent, respectively, in the next two
fiscal years.
But he added that the loss of federal stimulus and other one-time money
used to balance the last biennial budget would have an impact on
overall funding of schools and local governments.
According to documents, local government funding will decrease to $526
million in fiscal 2012 and $339 million in 2013, down from $642 million
in fiscal 2010 and an estimated $665 million in 2011.
That proposal prompted numerous questions from Democrats on the House
Finance Committee, who voiced concern about the impact on local
governments and school districts.
“My concern, obviously, is that we’re going to see 600-plus levies
across the state to raise revenue and we’re going to see property tax
increases to pay for this,” said Rep. John Carney, a Democrat from the
Columbus area.
But Keen said the governor made it clear that federal stimulus funding
would not be a part of the next budget.
“That should have been clear to people from the time that [the last
biennial budget bill] was put together and built that money in,” Keen
said. “This should be no surprise to anyone. I’m not sure that local
communities need to be talked to, unless folks have lived in caves.
This money is gone, and people should have been preparing for it.”
Keen added that he didn’t think the changes in the budget would require
new levies and increased local property taxes to make up the difference.
Instead, law changes proposed in the bill and others already making
their way through the Legislature — collective-bargaining and pension
reforms, for example — could provide a means for local governments to
control their costs.
“To me, it’s not a definite state of affairs that districts must go to
the ballot and pass levies,” he said.
“Perhaps districts should look at their operations and look at their
costs. Perhaps they should avail themselves of some of the tools that
the General Assembly is in the process of providing them or that are
contained in this budget bill to contain their costs.”
Read it at the Youngstown Vindicator
|
|
|
|
