Bernardo on the budget

County Commissioner Bill Doherty, Chairman
County Commissioner Mary J. LeClair, Vice-Chairman
P.O. Box 427
Barnstable, MA 02630 May 28, 2005

Re: Response to Veto of 2006 Budget

Dear Commissioners Doherty and LeClair:

The Assembly is in receipt of your letters stating the reasons for your veto of the 2006 County Budget. I am disappointed with this action and your reasons for veto. Futhermore, you now run the risk of putting the County Charter and Cape municipalities on a direct collision course.

A clear majority of delegates supported a line item for local aid. Chairman Doherty believes that the Commissionersâ?? original 2006 budget submitted to the Assembly was crafted to promote â??regional responses to the issues faced by Barnstable County.â?� The State believes that local aid is an appropriate regional response to regional issues. Yet, the Commissioners fail to supply local aid to municipalities, stating â??we have no surplusâ?� when in fact we have the same approximate surplus amount as last year.

The Commissioners have deliberately spent surplus revenues derived from the County Registry of Deeds in order to be able to claim thereâ??s no money left over. This intentional strategy raises two serious problems for our towns. First, the Commissioners, by their own admission, have funded programs based on unsustainable revenues, even going so far as to state that â??we will have to cut these same programs when monies slow at the registry.â?� There is no greater disservice to persons or towns than a hollow promise of on-going financial support for programs we know cannot be sustained. Secondly, by spending monies in order to eliminate what would otherwise be a surplus, the County loses its credibility with the fifteen Cape towns wherein our constituents reside.

In addition to the Commissionersâ?? decision to cut out our local communities, both Chairman Doherty and Vice-Chairman LeClair decry the reduction in the fiscal â??06 budget of some $150,000.00 as it relates to the Cape Cod Commission and the jobs they fear would be lost. A careful review of the total financial picture at the Commission shows this assertion is not accurate. The Cape Cod Commission has the means to fund all its services and staff if it so chooses. Even without the disputed $150,000.00, the Commission has access to ample reserves to fund all services and payroll expenses.

Vice-Chairman LeClair supports supplemental funding of the Commission by pointing out that the County covers rent and overhead for other departments, so why not the Cape Cod Commission as well? Because, the Cape Cod Commission is supported financially by separate legislation which provides it with a multi-million dollar revenue stream. It is a poor analogy to compare the Cape Cod Commission to a department that lacks any other means of support.

While Vice-Chairman LeClair supports funding overhead and staff expenses for the Cape Cod Commission, she believes license plate monies should not be used for administrative and overhead costs at the County Economic Development Council. Each and every other agency receiving these very same license plate funds expends them on administrative costs as related to tourism and economic development. Whatâ??s the difference? Administrative costs, including staffing, are part of the cost to better serve our towns.

The budget the Assembly passed was one of balance and accountability. The Assembly filled in ambiguous line items from the Commissionersâ?? budget with specificity, giving each program definition and precision. This same Assembly budget gave more human service monies to programs than did the Commissionersâ?? budget. The Assembly acknowledged the fiscal plight for Cape towns and directed 25% of surplus monies be offered, in the form of local aid.

The County Commissioners received more than 92% of what they wanted in the 2006 annual budget - yet it was not enough. The veto by Commissioners Doherty and LeClair represents an unfortunate step backwards in the short sixteen-year history of our regional government. The result of this unfortunate veto is that towns are left less supported, wondering why their needs and votes have been ignored.

______________________________
Thomas Paul Bernardo
Speaker, Assembly of Delegates
cc: Assembly of Delegates