Discretionary funds have been the topic of conversation ever since Wally wanted to give 100 grand to Rainbow Riding. Peter Candland found himself in the spotlight again, but this time, Moonhowlings can tell him “good job!”
Supervisor Candland has proposed elimating disrectionary funds.
On Tuesday, Candland presented the Board of County Supervisors with a rough draft of a resolution that would move their donations to private entities or nonprofits into the annual budget process. Candland’s resolution is tentatively scheduled for more discussion at the board’s June 5 meeting.
Donations to schools would be excluded from this procedural change, said Candland. The Gainesville supervisor would also like to discuss what to do with annual funding carried over by some supervisors for future projects.
“We should be like other localities and handle this in the normal budget process,” Candland said.
When Moonhowlings did research on other localities, we did indeed find that no “sister” county had discretionary funds for each district Supervisor. Supervisor Principi expressed concern regarding the complete elimination of discretionary funds.
At a forum on the discretionary funds issue in February, Principi defended the practice, saying it gives supervisors flexibility to respond to crises big and small. He said he spends just 3 percent of his district funds on outside nonprofits. Most of the money, he said, is allocated for office costs to serve his constituents.
Last September, supervisors were able to dip into those funds to react quickly after floods inundated Holly Acres Mobile Home Park, leaving dozens homeless, he said at the forum.
Here is my question, why doesn’t PWC have an emergency fund for, well, EMERGENCIES! As taxpayers we all contribute to the same kitty, why should our money be allocated as though each district is a separate entity. We are one county, we are all Prince William County residents.
Our budget process should be streamlined, we should behave and react as one county, not as 8 distinct districts. We look at discretionary funds not just as a means to promote favoritism, but also as a way to limit real cohesion as a county. No more east vs west, we are one county, and that should be reflected in the very foundation of how we “operate” our core finances.
We expect these funds that are divided up into 8 separate pieces of the pie to be enfolded within the core budget and utilized to address the needs of residents, no matter what part of the county they reside. This is not “extra” money, this is money that should have a process of allocation within the needs of the county. If, in the future, there is an emergency, there should be an appropriate mechanism that deals with whatever crisis occurs within the county.
Contrary to Peter Candland though, given the recent budget debate, we don’t believe there is too much money in the budget, we just believe it needs to be properly spent. That Rainbow Riding has somehow become included in the budget for an additional 178 grand has not gone unremarked for sure! Just because an item is in the budget, doesn’t mean it should be funded!
Peter Candland also deserves kudos for doing heavy duty work at the Westgate/Sudley neighborhood clean up last Saturday.
I hate to say this but his office seems more approachable since he has changed personnel. Perhaps we can start anew, sans nasty rumors told about us and those in the Westgate/Sudley community.
Imitation is the highest form of flattery.
It beats dull blog reading. A great summary of yesterday’s board meeting where Peter Candland was the young upstart.
H/T to the Sheriff of Nottingham for a job well done!
http://sheriffofnottinghampwc.blogspot.com
Thanks to the Sheriff for doing a job others don’t want to do! (listen to a board meeting.)
We await the next installment. Send word, merry men, when the ink dries! (and wenches)
@Moon-howler
For those of us who had supported other candidates in primary, Peter is certainly showing some very positive signs. Taking on the PWC powers-that-be, elites or whatever term you want to use and trying to take away their slush funds is a gutsy move and my hat is tipped to him. One of the main concerns some of us had was that Pete was there to be a rubber stamp vote for other supervisors, and he’s shown that not to be the case. Interesting also is that Moonhowlings and BVBL are again on the same page of an issue. No one likes their hard-earned tax money going into a slush fund that buys favors.
Echoing Moon, I hope Pete understands now that he can accomplish his goals without attacking Rural Crescent supporters or the proprietors of MH. Many of us support what he is trying to do with County spending.
He has already demonstrated that he knows where Westgate is, last weekend. That was an issue in the past.
I believe in second chances. However, no, I am not on the same page as bvbl. We here at moonhowlings do not have teaparty mentality. We are all for county funding that enhances quality of life. We just want to see funding run through the budget and approved rather than here a little, there a little. Truthfully, I don’t even mind a little. It is the A LOT that sends me over the edge.
Additionally, we are acknowledging that Mr.Candland is showing his willingness to change and to accept that we might not agree on some issues, in particular issues that really have nothing to do with local government. Truthfully, I believe that was stirred up by former employees, or so I have been told by people whose judgement I trust.
I believe that other blog has supported Mr. C all along. I supported first, Martha, and lastly Ann Wheeler.
Good for Peter for introducing this resolution. However, I really can’t imagine there’s much support from his fellow board members. Some of them seem to think it’s their money to do as they see fit. I definitely agree with leaving the schools out of it. I know my daughter has benefit ted directly from discretionary funds to schools from two different supervisors. I know the kids and teachers appreciated the donations greatly.
I’m with Moon on support for the Gainesville supervisor race. However, Peter did win the election and he is OUR representative. That being said, it is my sincere hope that he represents us well and all of those in our district. It is time to move forward.
This resolution is an excellent opportunity to catch the attention of residents countywide. I feel like we’ve been talking about discretionary funds for a long time, but nothing changes. I hope we can see some progress on this front.
Now, I’ve not spoken about the clean up. However, now is a perfect time to do so, since Moon has mentioned it. We hauled away five truck loads from my house. Two of those five needed to go to the Balls Ford Compost Facility. There was an older couple that contacted the Neighborhood Watch to see if anyone had a truck that could help them out. So, me and the mister were going to help them out. As it turned out I along with Peter went to the house. We were both surprised to see the amount of stuff to be hauled away. However, we assured them no problem, it would be gone. It took two trips to the school. Peter was NOT the least bit afraid to get his hands dirty here in good ole WestGate. I was very pleased to see him attend our clean up. I know I’m not the only one that was glad to have him here. I truly believe this was good for all.
I think Peter was brave to bring up the discretionary funds knowing none of his fellow board members would be pleased. I don’t think the intent when they were started was ever to stockpile large amounts of money and dole it out circumventing the process to give to organizations. It is obvious it was being abused and this is a good thing. That being said, I think small donations to various organizations shouldn’t have to go through the budget process. I think there should be a monetary threshold. All of the 501Cs in the county are providing services that are better off in their hands rather than the county’s and I think supporting them to a small degree and keeping that connection and awareness is useful to the supervisors.
I am glad to here Peter was in Westgate. I think he aspires to be a good supervisor and is willing to do what it takes to get people’s support.
Peter got off on the wrong foot during the primary season. I think he got some real bad advice, some of which was nothing other than malicious gossip.
He seems to have shaken off some of that now and I am willing to believe in second chances as I am sure most of those people who were offended are.
For example, I don’t think I deserve to not have representation simply because I am openly politically pro-choice and worked to get the immigration resolution where it is NOW rather than where it started off with probable cause.
The Sheriff of Nottingham needs to fix his blogs so it accepts comments.
I thought his/her narrative was clever, although not totally original. I have hear speculation about who the identity of the Sheriff really is. Does anyone want to take a guess?
Little birds are singing…….
Sheriff, if you want to keep the topic alive, get some comments on there. I tried but alas…it wouldn’t accept comments from me. That narrows the field right there.
The Sheriff is up and running now. You can log in to your google account. I was first.
Thanks, Sheriff.
So lets discuss the main idea….should the BOCS do away with the discretionary funds and go with budget only items?
I think I would like a hybrid situation. I would like to see small amounts given in the name of the taxpayer of PWC to schools, kids clubs etc. Large ticket donations should have to be approved through the budget and should not be rubber stamped. At no time should private groups get huge sums of money.
Part of the problem is also that once the money is given through discretionary funds, it immediately falls off the taxpayer’s radar. That is a problem.
No need to speculate.
I am a retiree with a background in law enforcement, a 40+ year resident of Prince William County (WestGate, Sudley, and now in the Brentsville District), and my name is Thad.
It was my personal hope that my identity would not be of any great import, only my ideas.
I am personally extremely disappointed in the direction of the County, and with the irresponsible manner in which are tax dollars are being allocated and the ever increasing tax burden being thrust upon us.
Welcome Sheriff. Please to meet you. I am glad you are accepting comments.
My taxes haven’t gone up that much. I have been howling over the idea that a noprofit such as Rainbow Riding would be considered for a grant of $200k. I question how much more we should put in to the War Museum. That organization appears to be on shakey grounds. I don’t have the energy to grouse about more than a couple of things a year.
What are your pet peeves?
Welcome to the blogging world Thad 🙂
My pet peeves are as follows:
Supervisors having access to discretionary funds and spending them to advance themselves and their political fortunes.
A five year tax (and spending) plan that will increase my taxes by more than 20% over that period, and when it advantages them, they act as though this five year plan is the Holy Grail itself not to be challenged in any way.
A Board that thinks nothing of doling out taxpayer money to non-profits that they choose to be the winners without assessing the value of the service provided to the County citizens, and whether it is a function government should be involved with at all (a repertory company getting $500 from one of the biggest abusers — Supervisor John Jenkins — that is too much for me to take).
I have no beef with the merit of the programs of many of the non-profits and even the schools (that should get their money in the normal budget process with the School Board) that have won the favor of individual Supervisors, but every one of those programs should be vetted in the regular budget process.
I know it makes me sound like a crank, but the reality is that the whole mess has made me cranky.
Thanks for the welcome. I hope I am up to it.
@Sheriff.
You have made some valid points. Perhaps some of our contributors want to comment on some of these? As for being a crank, no crankier than the rest of us. It seems that everyone has some “pet discretionary expenditure” that just makes them see red.
We have a couple of tea party folks here. We are a mixed bag of tricks, to say the very least. Elena and I are independent, non-tea party types. We don’t mind taxes but we do mind some of the games people play in the county.
We are very glad to see Peter Candland reaching out to his constituents however.
M-H