| Originally appeared in the
Rochester Post-Bulletin,
February 11, 2006
Governments can cooperate on solutions
Editors,
As a result of the 2005 legislative session, and in cooperation with
the State Auditor's Office, local governments in Minnesota have an
opportunity to present for consideration the concerns that mandates
can have on local governments. The State Auditor has encouraged
local governments to consider submitting mandates they believe are
in particular need of reform or repeal to help legislators take
necessary action. Although often portrayed as an unnecessary action
of the state or federal government, mandates may be a true
reflection of what essential activities should be performed by local
governments or they may indeed be an impediment to good efficient
government. The "unfundedness" of the mandate is often the chief
concern of the lower level of government. In this era of extreme
budget challenges, we do need to seek opportunities for appropriate
mandate relief in addition to redefining the roles of the state and
local partnership.
I must acknowledge that listing and reforming mandates is only one
tool to improving the state-county relationship and developing
outcomes for our citizens. There is a balance between what is good
government policy and what is cumbersome and wasteful government
policy. The mandate issue has been addressed before, over a period
of years, with little meaningful success. Meaningful and sustainable
mandate reform may require a more comprehensive look at statutes
that impact local costs:
report requirements;criminal penalties; process changes to our
administration of state statute or programs; the statutory setting
of fees (or requirement that a service be free) for local government
services, data or building use; and statutory exemptions or special
practices which lead to higher capital and maintenance costs of
county infrastructure.
Recently, the Olmsted County Board, in working with the Association
of Minnesota Counties (AMC) and Metropolitan Inter-County
Association, has submitted sample mandates to be considered for
removal including:
eliminating county payment of state sales and other taxes - this is
one government taxing another, an estimated cost to Olmsted County
of over $1 million in 2005; eliminate incarceration of short-term
felony offenders in county jails - a shift from state to county
government - an estimated cost of $303,000 in 2004-05; and eliminate
the requirement for the county to provide detoxification services
for drug dependant people and to be financially responsible for
those needing the service within their borders - a rapidly
escalating cost over which counties have little control - a cost to
our county of $770,000 in 2005. These are only a sample of many for
consideration.
While not a direct action of the state, the recently passed Federal
Budget Reconciliation Bill, puts extreme pressure on local tax
payers and the state government. Unless technical corrections
language as adopted by the National Governors' Association, is
achieved, Olmsted County is at risk of losing $5.8 million in
federal support of state mandated services; this translates into
nearly $13.5 million for southeast Minnesota counties. This includes
substantial dollars lost to non-profits which assist or carry out
our community response to those dealing with such issues as mental
health concerns, child protection, and protection of vulnerable
adults. We have recently informed our legislators that there are
four ways the state can lead: backfill the federal cuts for these
state programs; require the counties to meet the new costs through
property taxes (not preferable); substantially change the mandated
social service delivery system; or lobby Congress to support
language in a "technical corrections" bill to fairly address the
costs to local government. We will need to work together with our
state partners to find the best solutions.
Sincerely,
Paul F. Wilson
District 3 Olmsted County Commissioner
And Second Vice-President of the
Association of Minnesota Counties |
