Contributor Opinion by Rich Gottfried: Good Work; And Things To Watch On Budget

The following contributor opinion is by Rockville Central friend Rich Gottfried:

Some positive goals that were accomplished in this year's budget besides maintaining the services provided to support the City's operations include but are not limited to:

• Property tax rate reduction by one percent
• Property tax credit of $100
• No SWM Utility fee of $55.80 per ERU this year and utilizing the SWM fund balance to pay for the expenditures in this area in this fiscal year.
• Public hearing on switching from a contracted outside city attorney to an in-house attorney along with utilizing some contracted outside attorney's services in specialized legal areas.
• Increase in the income and the asset limits for the Homeowners Property Tax Credit program (the "circuit breaker" that lets seniors stay in their homes) and possibly future COLA ("cost of living adjustments") to the limits so that this program accurately reflects the high cost of living in Rockville.
• and many other services like the funding for some additional not-for-profit agencies.

Some concerns that are still unresolved in this year's budget include but are not limited to:

New style once per week trash pickup impacts: Since most of the City outside Hungerford has little knowledge that they will be losing once one pickup per week, is there anything built into the budget assumptions about the possiblility that the system might have to be retooled again should citizens request current service levels be retained? Namely, if projected savings (including increases in recycling rates) cannot be proven, or alternately buying more trucks to provide biweekly service. This of course must be carefully analyzed as the new style system is not equivalent to the old style system.

The parking garage enterprise fund operational financial deficit: If the parking fund is truly an enterprise fund like the water, sewer, SWM and refuse funds --- is the City planning make this fund "self-sufficient" by charging taxpayers a "user" fee, "subsidy", or "interest fee" as in the SWM utility fee example.

REDI, Inc.: There is an inherent conflict of interest having the City fund this nonprofit when the goals of REDI's mission are to entice new businesses to Rockville and to support and maintain existing businesses in Rockville.

Rockville already has a Chamber of Commerce where businesses pay membership dues to support the Chamber. REDI's goals and mission are great, however REDI should be a self-funded organization not by the City but by the business community, especially if REDI is as effective as claimed.

REDI cannot advocate effectively for existing businesses (for example the Home Based Businesses and the Stonestreet Businesses) against policies that the City proposes or that currently exist because REDI is funded by the City, hence a conflict of interest. "No man can serve two masters" and REDI cannot speak for Rockville based businesses in front of Rockville's City Council while it is taking its funding from that same Council.

What was decided regarding an audit committee, an investment committee, and a finance committee?

Speed camera revenue: Hopefully during the budget deliberations you will discuss scaling back this program once the overall goal of slowing down traffic for pedestrian safety is achieved. This program will gross $4.8 million dollars for FY09 alone and net $12.6 million dollars over the next five years.

What specific projects in the City will be funded with this money, and how will it affect negotiated traffic mitigation agreements with various developers?

The City may end up with an embarassingly large amount of money earmarked only for pedestrian safety projects, however that should not let developers avoid the costs of impacts generated by their projects.

Is there any mechanism in place to assure that this money is spent throughout the City, for both new projects and for retro-fit projects in older areas such as raised crosswalks, etc.

SWM Utility fee for FY10: There still needs to be some more discussion regarding the committment for staff and consultants amounting to $30 million over the next ten years - especially since there has been no clear distinction made between those parts of the program required by the State of Maryland and the federal government and those parts of the program that are being recommended by staff.

Other issues that could be raised but this is a starting point.

I am willing to volunteer my time to discuss the above items mentioned in detail with the M&C and of course with Mr. Cohen, the City's Director of Finance and with Ms. Tate, the City's Budget Director either as their consultant as needed or in the capacity as the City's Audit Committee Chairperson or the City's Finance Committee Chairperson, if I could be of service to the City of Rockville with my financial background, experience and expertise please let me know how I can help.

Let me know your thoughts, comments, and suggestions.

We all live in the City of Rockville together so let's make this the best place to live in and with a united front . . . together we can help each other out to the best of each of our abilities.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.