There is nothing more central to the idea of local government elections than the municipal budget and the taxes is generates. It is perhaps the nearest citizens get to having a measuring stick against which judge the performance of incumbents and the promises of challengers.
Usually, it's the taxes that are the focus of outrage in an election, but this year one of the key points of contention in this year's Upper Pottsgrove race is the budget itself.
One candidate, Democratic incumbent Elwood Taylor, has argued in multiple Facebook posts that the budgeting during his tenure has been cautious and conservative and built a surplus.
The Republican candidates, Cathy Paretti and Dave Waldt, are insisting that revenues have been repeatedly over-estimated and that surpluses have been counted in the revenues column where they do not belong.
This is good.
A debate about the budget is just the kind of thing people should be discussing in a local election and there has been plenty of intelligent questioning and discussion on the Facebook posts of the rival candidates.
What's bad is that an opportunity for the public to get a look at the first budget draft BEFORE the election, and thus be provided with a set of facts which would allow voters to decide which perspective was most accurate, has been removed for no clear reason.
Trace Slinkerd, the president of the board of commissioners, and Commissioner Renee Spaide have sided with their fellow Republicans in this debate Both signed a letter, paid for by the area Republican Committee and sent to voters, that makes prior budgets one of the central themes of the campaign.
The letter signed by Spinkerd and Spaide states: "In our first year (of majority control) we re-structured the budget process to properly place revenues against expenses for the 2019 budget."
"We are working to bring our budget process into a four-year plan to avoid exhausting our reserves in three to four years," they wrote.
Sounds good. Let's have a look BEFORE the voting begins. Don't tell the voters, SHOW the voters.
Nope. Not gonna happen.
Traditionally, the Upper Pottsgrove Commissioners have held a budget meeting BEFORE the election, giving voters an opportunity to get informed about the pending taxes and sewer costs and hold accountable the officials they are about to elect or reject.
That has changed this year.
Slinkerd, who has spearheaded the effort to get Taylor booted from the planning commission, moved Monday's budget meeting until after the election.
Why?
Contacted after 9 p.m. Monday Slinkerd responded to my question via email.
"The working session was adjusted because it is the day before the election and folks are busy. We still wanted to talk budget numbers in a working setting so we picked a different date."
Given that explanation, I remain puzzled.
If the budget was truly the hot mess the Republicans claim it to be, why not showcase their better budgeting BEFORE the election and let voters see their expertise? What a great opportunity to show the voters the truth of your claims.
Commissioner Martin Schreiber, who is not a candidate this year, wrote on Facebook that "this is the first time the BOC (board of commissioners) meeting has ever been cancelled the day before the election."
He also wrote, "I heard the president of the board did not feel it was right to have the meeting the day before election day."
I would argue the opposite.
Having the budget and any tax increase, or the absence of one, made public before the election is the epitome of government transparency. Moving it until after the election denies voters access to accurate information needed to make an informed choice at the polls.
No comments:
Post a Comment