L&T Publisher Earl Watt
Last week the Seward County Commission failed to pass a budget for the upcoming year after Chairman Scott Carr moved to approve the budget with an 8 mill increase and no other commissioner seconded the motion.
It’s understandable why. It’s a significant increase in one year even after the commissioners whittled away at what was first presented as a 20-mill proposal.
Local residents may have been surprised when they received their letters of the proposed increase of 20 mills, but that is not what the commissioners are currently considering. The commission’s current proposal is 8 mills.
Still, several residents attended the public meeting and did not show support for the proposal.
Carr did his best to explain why the county needed the increase, but he did not receive any support from his four counterparts with a second.
And that’s okay. Each of the five commissioners have to do what they believe is best for the county.
Without support for the 8 mill proposal, the commission then had a work session to revisit the budget, and I believe a second meeting is scheduled before they once again attempt to present something that can be supported by at least three of the commissioners.
But a split on the budget isn’t leadership if there is no alternative presented.
Each commissioner has an obligation to present something that would gain their support.
If a commissioner does not like the current proposal, there is nothing that prevents them from providing an alternative.
It should be required.
If the current increase is not acceptable, vote no. But present what would get your yes vote.
Have we seen that yet?
No.
The only option on the table has been the proposal that didn’t get a second.
And no one — no one — presented an alternative.
Commissioner Tammy Sutherland-Abbott defeated Nathan McCaffrey with the promise that she would not support a tax increase.
That’s a promise that is easy to keep. Just vote no on any tax increase.
But the true leadership must be attached to the commitment by showing how the county can avoid raising taxes. Make a proposal that keeps taxes from increasing. Voting against a tax increase is only part of the commitment to keep the county fiscally responsible. The other is to show how it can happen.
And the alternative might get three votes.
It might not.
But at least you fulfilled your commitment of promising to keep taxes from going up by providing an alternative.
Sutherland-Abbott is not alone. Three other commissioners did not second the 8 mill plan.
Where were their alternatives?
It would seem bizarre to bring back the exact same proposal and support it after making a very public statement that it was unacceptable just a few days ago.
But if 8 mills was not acceptable, where is the alternative? Who is working on a 3 mill plan? Or 5? Or anything other than the plan that has been the collective focus of the commission for the past several weeks?
It’s not Carr’s fault that he moved to pass the 8 mill plan. It was the only budget proposal on the table, and he along with the rest of the commission sat through hours and hours of meetings.
Where was the opposition then? Who spoke up and said they could not support the current proposal?
And it’s fine that they didn’t. That’s how the process works. But where was the alternative?
An anonymous letter from staff was written at a previous meeting and said it was irresponsible to run on the premise of not raising taxes.
That’s not necessarily true, but the responsibility comes by presenting an alternative that will accomplish what needs to be accomplished with a budget that holds the line.
There has been a lot of talk about how much of the budget is mandated. But that would be the same for all 105 counties in Kansas, and most of the taxing entities in the state are not raising taxes. They have pledged to remain revenue neutral.
If mandates were the problem, they would be the problem statewide, but since most entities are rejecting increases, there has to be some other need here.
And those needs should be better communicated to the public. While some may refer to the increases as part of the Book of Wishes, others may be actual needs. It could also be repairing what past commissions failed to do. How do those projects get done? Within last year’s total number?
That may or may not be possible in Seward County, but without an alternative to the 8 mill proposal, there is no way to know the road forward.
Those who didn’t support the budget need to provide the public with an alternative path. It’s not enough to say they do not like the proposed road to the future without providing an alternative path forward.
If the proposal fails, at least there was an alternative, something that would get that commissioner’s yes vote.
Families tonight will be deciding what’s for supper. And if everyone says no but doesn’t provide an alternative, no one eats.
True leadership will present a choice, a way forward so that everyone can have a chance to say yes to something. They will make that proposal in public, not at a work session alone.
It may take three yeses to pass a budget, but all five have an obligation to present something that would get their own yes. And from that point, let the negotiating begin.
This was contributed by Steve Merz:
In the work session, following the commission meeting, Tammy Sutherland-Abbott did present a proposal to send the budget back to the departments with instructions to find a way to cut the budget requests by 3 percent.
A very good and reasonable idea. T
hat was voted down by 3-2, with Commissioner Helm siding with Abbott. The city of Liberal kindly offered to pick up the tab for unmandated items, JCAP’s, Truancy Program, etc, for one year, but the County Commission declined. I was always taught to “not look a gift horse in the mouth”.