|
Two Proposed Bills Would Cost County Government Money
Posted 6-28-2004
If you ever wonder why county
government is such a bastion of contradictions and a conglomeration of
competing interests, two recent pieces of legislation working their way
through the Pennsylvania legislature show why. The first bill (Senate Bill
No. 735), endorsed by the State Constables' Association, will increase
constables' fees and add a component for a minimum mileage reimbursement
when they are rounding up their "clients". The second piece of legislation
(Senate Bill No. 930), being promoted by the Deputy Sheriffs' Association,
would give deputy sheriffs heart and lung benefits (for life) like police
receive.
I do not begrudge either
group for trying to get as much as possible regarding earnings or benefits.
But both will add to the costs of county government, and the County
Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania opposes both pieces of
legislation. We oppose them because they will add to the expense of county
governments. Particularly, we oppose them because both groups serve the
courts and in theory the Commonwealth is supposed to be funding the court
system in Pennsylvania, not adding more potential expenses for county
governments. Instead, these groups lobby the House and Senate, and many
legislators, wanting to make those groups happy, agree to support the
legislation without understanding the potential expenses for county
governments.
Our problems are twofold.
First, the minimum mileage issue means even if a constable travels five
miles to round up a suspect, he or she would be compensated for 10 miles.
Second, you may think the defendant would assume that cost, and, in some
cases, the defendant does. But in the many cases where defendants have no
money, the court assigns the county to pay those costs. Last year,
Westmoreland County government spent $265,000 in constable fees.
The deputy sheriff's bill
also has the potential to raise costs for county governments. It contains a
clause that if a deputy sheriff would show symptoms of heart disease or
tuberculosis after four years of service, it would be assumed that it was a
result of employment, and the county would have to pay lifetime
compensation. That is a potentially large liability that county governments
would have to assume.
My overall point is that the
legislature is faced with competing interests when legislation like this is
presented to them. I am sure they want to please those two constituencies,
the Constables' Association and the Deputy Sheriffs' Association, but the
County Commissioners' Association must look out for county taxpayers
throughout Pennsylvania and ask the legislature to consider the consequences
on our budgets.
It will be interesting to see
the outcome. I understand that the State Senate is now considering two
amendments to the Constables Bill. One eliminates the minimum mileage and
the other would make the Commonwealth assume any increased costs. Hopefully,
these amendments will make it into the final legislation.
We are working much harder,
both individually as commissioners and collectively through our association,
to communicate better with our representatives. Too often, I think they are
unaware of the consequences of certain legislation on county governments.
There has been so much thrust upon county governments over the years that
make budgeting such a challenge that we must be more assertive in fighting
additional un-funded mandates. Our position does not reflect insensitivity
to these special interests, but a better understanding of the growing
challenges county commissioners face when trying to balance a budget that
has increased burdens each year. |
