State Can Help Ease Restrictions on County
Posted 08-11-1998
Earlier this month I had the opportunity to testify before the State Legislative Local
Government Committee. State Representative Terry Van Horne of Lower Burrell, hosted the
hearings in our county, and it provided a forum for citizens, local government officials,
and folks like myself to share their concerns about how the Commonwealth regulates local
and county governments. I am not sure the total number of people who testified, but the
five legislators from the Local Government Committee heard from me on a broad range of
issues.
I first spoke about the need to make
changes to the County Code, the document that regulates how county governments operates.
There are a number of sections that relate to the competitive bidding process and they
need to reflect the challenges we have now with acquiring technological, patented, or
copyrighted products. Also the posting of surety bonds and performance bonds, instituted
to insure competitive bidding, may be having the opposite effect by deterring smaller
firms from bidding on county business.
Maintenance contract bidding for equipment
also presents a problem when bids may have to be awarded to firms that do not use
manufacturer's replacement parts. We experienced this problem this year when we could have
sent cars to Michigan to be refurbished with manufacturer's parts for about one-half the
cost of a new car. This work would have given us years of life, and miles of service for
the cars. But we were required to bid the work and there were potential bidders that would
not have used manufacturer's parts and the quality would have suffered. Instead we bought
several new cars at a higher price.
An area that I also presented was the area
of taxation and how limited Westmoreland County is in generating revenue. Senate Bill 2
addressed only tax reform for school taxes and left out counties and municipal
governments. The very inadequate legislation will likely cost the county money, because we
must prepare homestead and farmstead property valuations for each of the county's 17
school districts without being able to utilize any alternative forms of taxation ourself.
Also, school districts are limited to offering only a form of wage tax as the alternative
to property taxes. My guess is that in our county, very few school districts will be able
to offer any tax reform under this legislation. I suggested that counties be given the
flexibility to offer real tax reform. Citizens really are concerned about their total
property tax bill and if relief can come from county property taxes rather than school
property taxes, at least it is some property tax relief.
Currently as a third class county, we only
have the real property tax available to us. This year, property taxes will only generate
26% of the county's budget. Fourth through eighth class counties can levy per capita taxes
and an occupation tax. I presented an idea that counties be allowed to share in the real
estate transfer tax. The Commonwealth receives one percent, and school districts and
municipalities each receive one-half of one percent. The county must collect the tax but
receives none of the benefit. If we could receive one percent like the Commonwealth it
could generate several million dollars a year for Westmoreland County.
Other areas I presented to the Committee
were related to the number of solicitors the county code restricts us to employing. We are
allowed one solicitor and three assistants. While county government has grown, we are
limited, and inevitably must contract out much legal work. Also, while commissioners are
to represent all management personnel in collective bargaining, recent court decisions
clearly leave all hiring, firing, and supervision of employees of the courts and row
offices to those elected officials. It can create problems when the courts want to
implement one employee policy and we have another one in place.
The final issue I discussed was the 911
operation and how the surcharge, instituted to cover the cost of 911 operations, does not
cover our costs here. In 1997, we subsidized 911 operations with roughly $750,000 from our
General Fund. The $1.25 per line charge in our county would have needed to be $1.55 for us
to avoid a subsidy. I suggested consideration of a surcharge on cellular phones and the
possibility of counties presenting their case for an increased surcharge to the Public
Utility Commission, only with an audited accounting system and a documented long range
plan.
Hopefully, the legislators in attendance
will digest my testimony, along with the other testimony presented and begin to work in
Harrisburg to help allow county and local governments flexibility in dealing with the
broad range of problems we face. If they do, we can better serve you and prepare county
and local governments for the challenges of a new millennium. |
