The next budget work session will be this coming Saturday at the Buckhall Fire Department on Yates Ford Road. It will probably be a lot more comfortable and a lot more homelike for the supervisors and staff. I am not so sure it will reach more people. In fact, I am betting it reaches fewer.
The session cannot be broadcast. The only possible broadcast must be from the board chambers. The meeting cannot be changed back to the chambers because it has already been advertised for the Buckhall Fire Department.
I felt the session last Saturday was very informative. Even though the session ended early because of the horrible weather, I felt like I was coming away with a lot better knowledge of how the county worked. I am so sorry the decision was made to hold part 2 in another location.
The down side of all this is that the public will not be able to witness the antics of the supervisors. Last Saturday there were plenty of antics. In fact, two supervisors refused to vote on any of the straw votes to reinstate items cut from the budget which had been prepared for a 1.3% hike in revenue. I thought their behavior was frustrating and childish. No one knew their feelings about what should stay and what should go. Their antics had obviously been planned in advance. It is difficult to express how disappointing it was to watch this kind of obstructionism over adults not getting their own way.
I hope that the county will video the session and will post it along side of the other archives of county meetings. Even though people wont be able to see the work session live, at least they can watch it after the fact. I suggest letting Chairman Stewart know that you would like the county to record the work session and post it later on the county website.
To do so would be the most transparent thing to do.
Hopefully, our two newest supervisors will display more adult-like behavior for this coming session. They need to set a good example as well as represent their constituents.
No public comments at either meeting and now no public view.
Wont there be other times for public comments? Do work sessions really need a public hearing or can they wait until the budget is rolled out?
I think the public view is more important.
There’s always a public hearing before a budget is adopted.
They do not have to have one every time they have a work session, do they?
@Andyh
Nope. From a practical perspective, it is probably more useful to wait until more stuff is nailed down and presented in a comprehensive format. You can always email or call.
Exactly!
AndyH is correct. Meetings such as this must be public. There is no requirement to allow the public to speak. The public can come and watch. They can use what they learn to speak at a regularly scheduled board meeting during citizens time, write or email their supervisor, or meet with their supervisor.
Some meetings would never end if citizens time were allowed.
I supported Corey’s decision to not have chit chat time. These kinds of meetings at best never end. The weather was bad. Like you said, take notes, call or write your supervisor, speak at citizens time.
Can’t you just hear some clown loving the sound of his own voice and asking 40 different questions they had just explained?
PWC Chamber says raise the rates to attract business.
http://bristowbeat.com/business/pw-chamber-commerce-asks-supervisors-reconsider-tax-rate/
Two more worksessions scheduled after this Saturday: March 10th and 17th which are Tuesdays, so most likely will be in the Chambers and televised.
BOCS only scheduled one Public Hearing on the Budget: April 14th at 7:30 pm. So in between, like ElGuapo wrote, there are the regularly scheduled Citizens Times.
And now for the BPOL impacts from a Court case….no mention of PWC or our Cities in the article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-court-ruling-on-business-taxes-could-mean-big-loss-of-tax-revenue/2015/02/25/4b85dfc4-bd14-11e4-bdfa-b8e8f594e6ee_story.html?hpid=z4
I didn’t find their behavior childish at all. If we agree on the assumption that the public wants a lot of stuff but can’t/doesn’t want to pay for everything they want (kind of like in real life), then priorities need to be set. Having just received the materials for the work session, going line by line without seeing what they all added up to as a whole and in relation to other items/programs in the 500 page budget document, I think the fact that any of them voted was silly. It was a procedure that was seriously flawed or intentionally disingenuous; it was a bridge to nowhere and downright ludicrous. Of course they’d like to see all those items back in, in theory and without constraints. What was the point of that exercise, if Stewart is correct that “no one wants to see a tax bill that high?” (currently at over 6% increase) when it’s all added back in (and before addressing other “critical” unmet needs)? It was a waste of 4 hours, for the most part — not to mention all the time the county staff spent preparing for it — because the county is no closer to figuring out what it is going to do. The hard work is in prioritizing — not saying, “yeah, that program does a lot of good; I support it.” The situation changes if you have to support one program at the direct cost of another or at an increased tax burden to your constituents. But green dots next to Supervisors’ name sure do make people feel good. Yay for that.
The other key but not explicitly identified assumption is that the list items provided by the county staff are the only available cuts to be made. Don’t you find it kind of strange that dental care for indigent children made the list, even while taxpayers are funding $2M this year in vacant county positions (many of which that have been unfilled for 6-12 months or more)? Antics are not limited to the supervisors. It’s the nature of politics and public administration. And the only way to make sure the taxpayers and vulnerable populations don’t become mere pawns in the game is for people to show up and hold them all accountable with knowledge and a desire to actually make our community work well (not just with rhetoric, hyperbole, and hyperventilating diatribes meant to get one’s way or personal attacks on those with different opinions). See you Saturday.
You apparently have a lower bar than I do for childish behavior. Simply voting no would have been the more grown up way to handle this issue. Then the public knows beyond a shadow of a doubt where the politician stands.
You obviously don’t understand about filling positions. The county gets tens of thousands of applications per year. I bet they don’t have 10 people going through them. Some positions are harder to fill than others with the right applicant. The positions have to be funded before they can be advertised.
Basically I never agree with people who have tea party mentality. I find that they are often self serving and almost always cheap when it comes to watching out for anyone but themselves. I like living in an area where we support arts, the girl scouts, boys and Girls club, the cloggers, and a raft of other things. I escaped the boondocks a long time ago. I don’t want to go back. I also like having good schools. I like having a professional Police department with well trained, well paid officers. I don’t like our teachers having to moonlight. It generally causes problems or at best ends up with exhausted teachers teaching our kids.
No, I don’t find it strange. The CXO was tasked with the job of bringing a budget to the board that only had a 1.3% increase. She did it. Now I hear nothing but griping. I don’t even want to hear about priorities. How do you chose the cops over the teachers or the girl scouts over the boys and girls club? Maybe we will have to cut everyone back a little, rather than creating an either/or situation.
I don’t live in a binary world. My world is not black or white. Green dots don’t make me feel good and I detect a smug, demeaning tone. I think you might want to talk to your two favs and tell them to man up and to answer yes or no. We need to know if they want to keep a line item or discard it.
Plenty of info was given by the slide set up by Mr. Scarbrough.
Comments like yours are part of the reason why they want to get away from the cameras and “green dots” this weekend. These are working sessions, and voters should want the supervisors to be able to ask as many questions as they need to and gather the information they believe they need to make thoughtful decisions without having to vote on anything right away. Slides don’t tell the whole story of a program, as evidenced by how many questions the supervisors asked. I think the process led to a wasted opportunity, plain and simple, and I think some of the items put up for reductions were done so to prove a point more than to just “do a job.” That being said, Mr. Scarborough’s spreadsheet was by far the best thing to come out of that meeting, and he deserves the accolades of the day for that.
My intent wasn’t to be demeaning in any way; my comment was towards what I view as a pointless exercise of voting on the line items like that during the first working session and the Chairman insisting on it, but point taken. However, I never said anything about not wanting to live in a nice community (and being willing to pay for it), though I can’t quite get on board with tax-subsized clogging. 🙂 I also don’t agree with your assessment that anyone is “choosing cops over teachers”, but I would love to see this county spend more per student (AND work towards better accountability of how the money for our schools is spent). I’d even consider voting in favor of a meals tax if that is how we have to get the significant additional revenue to bring those class sizes down and address some of the pricier capital needs in our near future. So I guess you could say I don’t live in a binary world, either. I can vote for Lawson and still support funding for the Boys and Girls Club and senior centers. It is possible!
Thanks for the dialogue; this is my first foray into posting on a blog. It may also be my last, but I appreciate the opportunity to discuss!
My comments should not keep the supervisors from working in public. That is what they are there for. Now, should I be allowed to comment while they are working? No. I supported the chairman’s decision to not take public comments. That just draws out the process. There will be a video of the events. I am just not sure if the county is sending out its camera crew. I realize it cannot broadcast live but the county can sure video its own events and archive the meeting. Same on it if it doesn’t.
I expect shaving a budget down from 4% to 1.3% increase was a herculean task. That’s what the supervisors asked for and that is what they got. They need to decide what stays, what goes, and what amounts will be attached if a line item stays. I think Pete asked for something, got it, and then didn’t know what to do with it. In other words, once again, I think he got bad advice. He needs to shut off those voices that tell him to always pick a fight. He needs to get in there and work with those who were elected leaders of Prince William County. I think he would be amazed to see what working together does. He should try it.
I never said that is what you wanted. It’s what you get when you take cuts like that. I thought it was an extremely useful session last week. I walked away feeling like I knew a whole lot more about how the county was spending the money they collect in taxes. It was informative. I don’t know why you felt it was a waste of time. Perhaps you know a whole lot more about the county than I do. I just worked for them. I didn’t have to understand each line item. I thought it was a good process because I learned. So did a lot of other people I know. Probably the supervisors learned also. After all, they don’t know it all.
Those were just examples. I don’t even know if we have cloggers. We might. I don’t mind if groups and non-profits a little from a pool of money. That becomes part of the texture of the community and what makes us unique. I suppose I would ask the question : would these programs exist if it weren’t for county money? Cloggers aren’t a community service. They are (hypothetically) under arts. As badly as this blog has howled over the vast amounts of money going to Rainbow Riding, I don’t care if they get some money from the county to help offset the cost of what they do. In fact, I would support them in their effort to be part of that community effort. They do a pretty decent job of fund raising also. (the objection has been over discretionary funds and transparency)
There are those who do not want any of the non-profits to have county money. I believe Pete and Jeanine might fall into this category. I disagree with them if that is the case. I think if we are tightening the budget that we trim down what is allocated for each group rather than throwing them off the list.
Now, there is one group I have more questions about. I am not sure why any soccer groups get money from the county. Do we give money to little league and kids’ football also? There might be a perfectly logical explanation and I missed it. No one has come along to explain why youth soccer gets money. Why aren’t the leagues and parents paying for this? So far, no one has answered my question about this one.
I have voted for the meals tax in the past. I am not sure I would do it again. Put me down as a big question mark. Why do I say that? Back when I voted yes I was working full time and just didn’t go out to eat as much. Meals taxes very much add to your check when you eat out. Don’t believe me? Go eat in the City. Your check will be bigger, even if you just go to burger King. I think Haymarket also has one that gouges me every time I stop at McDonalds for my iced coffee. I would just rather pay my extra $20 per month along with my house payment than be gouged to death every time I eat out. There is an argument that you gouge guests to your area. Not strong enough to have me vote for it. Taxes never go away once you get them.
I think you probably need to encourage Lawson to support the senior Centers and the Boys and Girls Club and to think for herself. We aren’t all going to want the same things. I really agree with you on the senior center and boys and girls club, however. I agreed with Bob and Mrs. Marshall about the senior day care center. I supported them 100% and I almost NEVER agree with Bob Marshall on anything.
We are always here to discuss a variety of topics. Have an issue you don’t see covered? That’s what the open thread is for. Most of the time we are polite and try to have discourse. Today might have been an exception. Glad I took the day off to binge watch House of Cards. I understand there was a rumble here. [stern look at “the boys” in my hood. ]
You all know I would have done some manners smack down if I had been here.
I saw this on tv. Thought I might go and listen. Wait a minute- closed session!?!
Susan, you can go in person. They just cannot broadcast from outside the chambers. I am sorry I cannot see it live, also. I think all public meetings should be in chambers for that very reason. Not all of us can get out to see the supervisors govern. (Did I just use the word “govern?”)
The meeting starts at 10 and at noon the school board joins them. At least one of the supervisors mistakenly thinks he has control over HOW the school board spends its money when in essence, what he has control over is how much the school board gets in the first place.
Welcome. Your comments will no longer be held in moderation once the first one is approved.
I went to the meeting this morning (the first session; had to leave before the School Board portion began), and I will admit, it was still pretty formal. Probably better to keep it in the McCoart building with more citizen access if it’s still going to follow the same/similar procedures. There didn’t seem to be much benefit to changing the location. Also, to clarify, I do not think the entire meeting was a wasted effort; the county staff provided a lot of good information and I’m grateful for their effort and knowledge. I in no way think I know more than anyone; I’m learning a lot and benefited from the information presented. I think the voting as they did it was misguided and premature. If I were to do a presentation to my boss, telling him the budget is constrained, providing a laundry list of possibilities to cut but only going one line at a time and asking him/her to make a decision with each line, that process would be a big no-go. I’d be told to go through the entire list first, answer questions about each program, outline impacts of not having each one, and then he/she would be better prepared to make some choices with a better frame of reference and more context in mind. The information provided was very useful; the straw poll/voting would have served more purpose at the end of the two working sessions. I think that was the point of abstaining, in addition to wanting more information on other sources of funding (reserves) before voting; I still do not believe that is childish, but we can agree to disagree there. By the way, the material covered today regarding the different reserves was enlightening; I hope they did record it and post it online. Thanks for the chance to clarify what I meant by waste of time. I should have been a bit more measured in my words.
I might agree that the 1.3% figure wasn’t a great starting point and riled a lot of people up. Why I’m undecided is that the 1.3% proposal has generated a lot of discussion that may not have happened otherwise, and it appears to be resulting in taxpayer dollars going a little farther than they were (the staff announced today that they identified $3.4M that could be reallocated from current purposes to cover projected cuts without negatively impacting current levels of service). The discussion also resulted in no longer funding a $275K program that had a 19% success rate (with a total number successfully served of 2 per year) — and I applaud Mr. Principi for being the only one who was asking questions with respect to performance metrics that led to this decision. And that $25K to soccer has to go for sure. Perhaps that is something that would have happened anyway, but Ms. Caddigan requested these working sessions as a departure from the way the last few years have gone, so I’m not so sure.
The possibility of the meals tax came up a few BOCS meetings ago, and it got me thinking about it. I don’t know if I’d vote for it — too many variables and I haven’t put actual numbers to the idea — but I would certainly think about it if the cause was grand enough (our schools for instance, though I’m quite concerned about the level of accountability with our school dollars as is) and it provided those with limited discretionary income to control the outlay of more taxes. Not sure it happens that way though. Would be an interesting case study.
I think everything but town hall meetings should be videoed as a matter of record. Actually, I see no reason why the county can’t send out a camera crew to town hall meetings.
Soccer–I wouldn’t care if they got rid of that. I think that parents should pay for youth sports programs. Communities and leagues can help those with financial needs.
The work session could have been conducted in several ways. One way is to go through and get the things to save and the things to toss. you might want one thing, I might want another,. They can get down to the finer print later on. I think Pete and Jeanine should have either voted yes or no. The procedure should have been decided ahead of time. Or…leaving it up to the chairman. You just don’t refuse to answer when you don’t get your way. That is how it came across to many people in PWC and they were simply NOT impressed. The bottom line is, if Pete and Jeanine are going to be successful, they are going to have to become salesmen (woman) and sell the rest of the board on their points. You just cant take the obstructive route.
Thanks for bringing a little information back. I felt last Saturday was a learning experience for me. I wish today had been televised.