|
|
From Governing’s
Grading the Counties introductionFebruary 2002 issue
THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE PROJECT
Report Card:
Now the latest economic downturn is forcing the county into a whole new round of painful decisions. With sales tax revenues down and New York State failing to deliver needed funds on time, the county’s fund balance is in severe decline. Last summer, Monroe issued $60 million in revenue anticipation notes for short-term liquidity. Fitch then downgraded the county’s general obligation bond rating from AA to AA- and added a “rating outlook negative.”
Government officials acknowledge that the county is unprepared for a financial emergency, both in its reserves and in its mindset. “We have more than adequate capacity to raise taxes,” says one. “But there’s a very strong feeling that we won’t.” That’s certainly been the county’s history. Monroe’s property taxes haven’t gone up in 10 years.
The anti-tax philosophy has forced the government into a perpetual mode of budget-cutting. Technology has served as one of the easiest targets and most unfortunate victims. The county’s tech budget has been slashed from $13.7 million to barely $9 million in the past three years, and new projects rarely get the green light. The result is a collection of outdated systems that aren’t integrated, missed opportunities for efficiencies and little use of technology for citizen support. There is movement in the right direction — the county has begun drafting an IT strategic plan — but little hope that it will be supported throughout the government. “We’ve got a great process, but if all the projects get canceled, then why are we wasting all our time doing this?” asks one county official.
The county does do a commendable job in preparing its capital program. Departments justify upfront and long-term project costs, which are then centrally reviewed for impact on the county’s debt level and operating budget. And Monroe is among the minority of jurisdictions that depend heavily on citizens in helping to shape capital plans. Residents make up half the membership of the board that recommends the annual capital plan, and citizen-based committees walk through all roadway projects during construction.
Positives: Improved technology helps with budget tracking; debt level manageable; tobacco securitization used to pay down outstanding bonds; county employs full-time cash-management analyst; long-standing relationship with financial adviser; frequent use of master contracts.
Negatives: Inadequate fund balances; no rainy day fund; county had to borrow $60 million in 2001 for short-term needs; budget-writing process cumbersome and technologically weak; revenue estimate doesn’t serve as spending cap; understaffed budget office limits analysis; low formal bidding threshold for services slows procurement process; better technology needed to support procurement.
Positives: Six-year capital improvement plan; strong emphasis on operating cost estimates; cost-benefit analyses used to justify decision making for new projects; large projects receive funds for preprogramming studies; public involvement in planning for road projects, with citizens comprising half of advisory planning board; most projects in on time and on budget; highway condition assessed every two years.
Negatives: Project-tracking reports insufficiently detailed; no comprehensive countywide inventory and condition information; no estimates of deferred maintenance; GIS not used widely for planning or facility management.
Positives: Managers can hire, discipline and terminate employees in timely manner; effort under way to change IT classifications to improve tech recruitment; increased attention to training, including new seven-day seminar for supervisors.
Negatives: Too many job titles; no formal workforce planning; no cash rewards and few non-cash rewards for superior performance; too many cases go to arbitration; several union contracts continued two years past expiration date; HR computer systems not integrated, forcing difficult data reconciliation process.
Positives: Broad-based managing-for-results system in pilot stage; some key countywide measures already tracked; strategic plans in place at departmental level; departments implement most audit recommendations; extensive use of performance-measurement training.
Negatives: Outputs delivered by departments don’t guide budget; budget office doesn’t have time to read audits; countywide measurement reporting to citizens needs improvement.
Positives: Criminal justice system integrates information from sheriff’s office, courts and police; more formal procurement standards being developed by IT and departmental staff; IT strategic plan in development.
Negatives: Technology not an overall priority; county IT budget sliced from $13.7 million to $9 million over past three years; offices chronically understaffed; weak disaster preparedness; county clerk’s office running e-commerce effort; sewer department running GIS, primarily for its own needs; little use of Web site for two-way citizen communication; past informal procurement standards have been chronically violated.
|
 |
s the 1990s came to an end, Monroe County’s government had reason to be hopeful that it had already endured the worst blows fate could deliver. Two of the county’s largest employers, Xerox and Kodak, had laid off thousands of workers and badly damaged the local tax base. But things only got worse. Last year, Genesee Hospital — a private employer of about 2,200 and one of the largest area medical centers — closed its doors.