According to today's paper (link), Lucas County Sheriff James Telb is over budget.
So what's new?
The Sheriff Department is consistently over budget. When I was a commissioner (years 2003 through 2006), it was a constant concern because any savings other elected officials might have had in their budgets was used to cover his overages.
The county's Office of Budget and Management constantly informed him throughout each year that he was overspending in multiple line items, but Telb always counted upon the practice of just covering his costs when the county closed out the books at the end of the year.
No matter how loudly I complained, little media attention was given to the fact that this elected official just could not live within his means. Even during election years, the lack of fiscal management never really made it into the discussion, despite valiant attempts by some challengers.
While I'm glad to see the coverage today, I'm wondering why it's taken so long to inform the public of Telb's long-standing 'tradition' of spending more than was/is allotted.
But I'm sure you have your own theories about that...
So the question now is this: What will the commissioners do? Will they complain and then just cover the costs as they've done in the past? Or will they tell Telb 'no more money' and let the consequences prevail?
What do you think?
Showing posts with label James Telb. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Telb. Show all posts
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Monday, November 30, 2009
Lucas County to 'governmentize' private sector jobs
Lucas County Sheriff James Telb has decided to move in house the job of appraising foreclosed properties, effectively having government take over private sector jobs.
I'm not a fan of how Telb has doled out this task, making sure that politically connected individuals get the lucrative contracts. But that concern is for how the Sheriff selects the individuals - not in the fact that the private sector is employed for the task.
You see, in Ohio, each foreclosed property must have three independent appraisals prior to auction. All three appraisers must agree on the value which is then set as the minimum amount in the auction. When the property is sold, $35 is collected from the buyer to pay for the cost of the appraisal.
The best 'political' part of the process is that state law doesn't require any special expertise in order to do the appraisal and the county sheriff gets to decide who gets the job.
Bringing the appraisals in house means that sheriff deputies will perform the appraisals. Some might say this is a good thing because the patronage will end. I'm not one of them.
If there is the potential for bias in the selection of appraisers, then revise the selection process. But it's wrong for government to take over private sector jobs just to bring in revenue.
And that's what this is all about - more money into the county coffers.
From The Blade report on the issue:
In March, Commissioner Pete Gerken said he'd rather pay UAW members to do the work. The UAW represents the Sheriff deputies:
So this all about finding work for government/union employees and bringing nearly half a million dollars into the general fund.
But having that revenue in the public coffers means that the individuals who were performing the work (and for some of them it's their ONLY income) will no longer have a job. Perhaps the commissioners have decided the only jobs they want to 'preserve' in the county are government ones?
And this may not actually save any money. The news stories report that a deputy, with benefits, costs around $65-70,000/year. Let's use the $65,000 figure for our comparison.
In 2008, nine appraisers were paid $$459,148. That means the average yearly payment is about $51,016. That's less than we'd pay the deputies. Now, some of the appraisers did more work than the others, resulting in higher payments, but that doesn't change the fact that the work needed to be done. And with foreclosures expecting to remain high (maybe even higher than in 2008), the amount of work isn't going to decrease - at least for a while.
So what happens when the appraisal work does decline - as it surely will? Will those deputies who kept their job still remain on the payroll? Knowing the county operations and the desire for law enforcement over other expenditures, they probably will. The costs of the deputies will remain, while the 'revenue' funding them will decrease. And that's an excellent argument for using private contractors for the work.
Except in Lucas County - where the focus is on government revenue.
Is this really what government priorities should be? To get as much money as possible even if it means 'governmentizing' what the private sector is both capable of and willing to do?
Some in this area think so. It's why government has taken over the towing tasks and ambulance transportation services in the city of Toledo. And why Toledo politicians are constantly talking about 'revenue enhancements' - which translates into 'higher taxation' in one way or another for citizens.
If the Lucas County Commissioners really want to 'save' money, they should look at privatizing tasks - not governmentizing them. There is no need or logic for government to take over jobs, functions or activities that the private sector can and will do - and usually at a lower cost.
I'm not a fan of how Telb has doled out this task, making sure that politically connected individuals get the lucrative contracts. But that concern is for how the Sheriff selects the individuals - not in the fact that the private sector is employed for the task.
You see, in Ohio, each foreclosed property must have three independent appraisals prior to auction. All three appraisers must agree on the value which is then set as the minimum amount in the auction. When the property is sold, $35 is collected from the buyer to pay for the cost of the appraisal.
The best 'political' part of the process is that state law doesn't require any special expertise in order to do the appraisal and the county sheriff gets to decide who gets the job.
Bringing the appraisals in house means that sheriff deputies will perform the appraisals. Some might say this is a good thing because the patronage will end. I'm not one of them.
If there is the potential for bias in the selection of appraisers, then revise the selection process. But it's wrong for government to take over private sector jobs just to bring in revenue.
And that's what this is all about - more money into the county coffers.
From The Blade report on the issue:
Last year, the nine appraisers were paid a total of $459,148 by buyers at auction - money the county would like to have for its own. Moving the work in-house could preserve the jobs of some deputies and it would make the money available for the county's general fund.
In March, Commissioner Pete Gerken said he'd rather pay UAW members to do the work. The UAW represents the Sheriff deputies:
"...I'd rather be paying UAW-represented county employees to keep their jobs ... than to pay sub-contractors," Gerken said.
So this all about finding work for government/union employees and bringing nearly half a million dollars into the general fund.
But having that revenue in the public coffers means that the individuals who were performing the work (and for some of them it's their ONLY income) will no longer have a job. Perhaps the commissioners have decided the only jobs they want to 'preserve' in the county are government ones?
And this may not actually save any money. The news stories report that a deputy, with benefits, costs around $65-70,000/year. Let's use the $65,000 figure for our comparison.
In 2008, nine appraisers were paid $$459,148. That means the average yearly payment is about $51,016. That's less than we'd pay the deputies. Now, some of the appraisers did more work than the others, resulting in higher payments, but that doesn't change the fact that the work needed to be done. And with foreclosures expecting to remain high (maybe even higher than in 2008), the amount of work isn't going to decrease - at least for a while.
So what happens when the appraisal work does decline - as it surely will? Will those deputies who kept their job still remain on the payroll? Knowing the county operations and the desire for law enforcement over other expenditures, they probably will. The costs of the deputies will remain, while the 'revenue' funding them will decrease. And that's an excellent argument for using private contractors for the work.
Except in Lucas County - where the focus is on government revenue.
Is this really what government priorities should be? To get as much money as possible even if it means 'governmentizing' what the private sector is both capable of and willing to do?
Some in this area think so. It's why government has taken over the towing tasks and ambulance transportation services in the city of Toledo. And why Toledo politicians are constantly talking about 'revenue enhancements' - which translates into 'higher taxation' in one way or another for citizens.
If the Lucas County Commissioners really want to 'save' money, they should look at privatizing tasks - not governmentizing them. There is no need or logic for government to take over jobs, functions or activities that the private sector can and will do - and usually at a lower cost.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Charging for Sheriff patrols needs to be uniform
The Lucas County Commissioners and Sheriff James Telb have been meeting with and telling township trustees that they will now have to pay for services from the Sheriff's Department.
I understand the county's desire to collect more revenue for the Sheriff's Department - which habitually overspends and is rarely able to stay within their approved budget.
As a commissioner, I advocated against bailing out the Sheriff when he couldn't meet his budget, but was always on the losing end of that idea. My position was that rewarding his overspending with more funds just encouraged the poor fiscal behavior.
Then there is the general perspective that government should fund its mandates before doing anything else, and if the Sheriff's Department has a mandate to 'preserve the public peace' in the county, then that should receive funding before any 'initiative' that is the fancy of any commissioner.
Comm. Ben Konop has identified several cost saving measures (from a 4-day work week to lowering thermostats in buildings, including privatizing some services), but he wants to use those funds to give some Lucas County residents a 'free' college education (though it wouldn't really be 'free' if they have to 'serve' after graduation). He, and the other commissioners, reject using those cost saving ideas to fund current services - like the Sheriff's patrol in the unincorporated areas of the county.
This is part of the overall expansion of government that many, including me, find so repulsive: available dollars or cost savings are not used to reduce OUR payments to government, but to provide more and more 'services' for some while continuing to expect the same, and often more, funding from the rest of us.
But for the sake of argument, let's say that billing the townships for the services of the Sheriff Department makes sense and is the 'right' thing to do.
Will the Commissioners and Sheriff also charge the City of Toledo? Or is this just a billing of the townships?
The Sheriff has a downtown Toledo patrol car/route that covers many of the county buildings. Around the first of May, at the urging of Konop, the Sheriff agreed to some additional services within Toledo to help with the safety of citizens after the city laid off police officers.
According to the paper at the time, these are some of the arrangements made:
Some of these have no costs associated with them - but others do, as Telb explained:
So - if there are 'limited' costs, will Toledo be charged for those costs the same as the townships? And at the same rate?
If the commissioners believe that some jurisdictions should pay for road patrols by the Sheriff, certainly they agree that ALL jurisdictions should be treated the same, and charged the same rate.
I'll be interested to see how much Toledo is charged for the patrols within their limits.
I understand the county's desire to collect more revenue for the Sheriff's Department - which habitually overspends and is rarely able to stay within their approved budget.
As a commissioner, I advocated against bailing out the Sheriff when he couldn't meet his budget, but was always on the losing end of that idea. My position was that rewarding his overspending with more funds just encouraged the poor fiscal behavior.
Then there is the general perspective that government should fund its mandates before doing anything else, and if the Sheriff's Department has a mandate to 'preserve the public peace' in the county, then that should receive funding before any 'initiative' that is the fancy of any commissioner.
Comm. Ben Konop has identified several cost saving measures (from a 4-day work week to lowering thermostats in buildings, including privatizing some services), but he wants to use those funds to give some Lucas County residents a 'free' college education (though it wouldn't really be 'free' if they have to 'serve' after graduation). He, and the other commissioners, reject using those cost saving ideas to fund current services - like the Sheriff's patrol in the unincorporated areas of the county.
This is part of the overall expansion of government that many, including me, find so repulsive: available dollars or cost savings are not used to reduce OUR payments to government, but to provide more and more 'services' for some while continuing to expect the same, and often more, funding from the rest of us.
But for the sake of argument, let's say that billing the townships for the services of the Sheriff Department makes sense and is the 'right' thing to do.
Will the Commissioners and Sheriff also charge the City of Toledo? Or is this just a billing of the townships?
The Sheriff has a downtown Toledo patrol car/route that covers many of the county buildings. Around the first of May, at the urging of Konop, the Sheriff agreed to some additional services within Toledo to help with the safety of citizens after the city laid off police officers.
According to the paper at the time, these are some of the arrangements made:
- Deputies who already patrol county buildings will be more available to respond to police calls downtown.
- Toledo Police would get first-in-line status at booking prisoners in the jail to get officers back to the street more quickly.
- Off-duty deputies will be assigned to the schools to replace Toledo police known as "school resource officers" for the rest of the school year. The school districts would pay for the deputies' time.
- Laid-off officers would be deputized so they can continue to earn money "projecting" at supermarkets, baseball games, and concerts. The entities hiring the officers would pay for the uniforms and gear.
- Deputies would attend Block Watch meetings in place of Toledo police officers.
- The sheriff would keep four SWAT team officers on duty to back up Toledo in an emergency.
Some of these have no costs associated with them - but others do, as Telb explained:
"We understand it's a bad situation and we'll do the best we can in the sheriff 's office to do our part to try to make the streets as safe as we can, at very limited cost."
So - if there are 'limited' costs, will Toledo be charged for those costs the same as the townships? And at the same rate?
If the commissioners believe that some jurisdictions should pay for road patrols by the Sheriff, certainly they agree that ALL jurisdictions should be treated the same, and charged the same rate.
I'll be interested to see how much Toledo is charged for the patrols within their limits.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Blade bias - #7
While we are no longer surprised, in any way whatsoever, by the bias shown in our local newspaper, The Blade, I will continue to point it out - hoping that either you will learn to recognize it yourself, or that they will stop doing it. I'm more confident of the former than the latter.
But with so many prior posts on the issue, I've had to start numbering them.
Today's story on the indictment of several Lucas County Sheriff employees, including Sheriff James Telb, is the third version of the article since the news broke yesterday.
Despite mentioning his age (70) and how many years he's served in elected office (25), the article does not mention his party affiliation - which is Democrat, by the way.
Contrast that how often the party affiliation is used in any other story and you'll see that their omission on this one is glaring, particularly in light of the fact that this is a 'scandal' story about a Democrat. Would a Republican have been spared the party affiliation?
While they do have a side bar about his lack of campaign opponents, it's on page 9 and the note on the front page referencing the additional information only says "James Telb's first campaign for public office was in 1984. Page 9."
That side bar does give his party affiliation, but there is no reason to exclude it on the front page main story about the incident.
This is what we've all come to expect from our paper. But just because we can anticipate it does not mean that we have to tolerate it without comment.
UPDATE: This issue is now a story at NewsBusters, thanks to fellow Ohio blogger Tom Blumer at Bizzy Blog.
But with so many prior posts on the issue, I've had to start numbering them.
Today's story on the indictment of several Lucas County Sheriff employees, including Sheriff James Telb, is the third version of the article since the news broke yesterday.
Despite mentioning his age (70) and how many years he's served in elected office (25), the article does not mention his party affiliation - which is Democrat, by the way.
Contrast that how often the party affiliation is used in any other story and you'll see that their omission on this one is glaring, particularly in light of the fact that this is a 'scandal' story about a Democrat. Would a Republican have been spared the party affiliation?
While they do have a side bar about his lack of campaign opponents, it's on page 9 and the note on the front page referencing the additional information only says "James Telb's first campaign for public office was in 1984. Page 9."
That side bar does give his party affiliation, but there is no reason to exclude it on the front page main story about the incident.
This is what we've all come to expect from our paper. But just because we can anticipate it does not mean that we have to tolerate it without comment.
UPDATE: This issue is now a story at NewsBusters, thanks to fellow Ohio blogger Tom Blumer at Bizzy Blog.
Monday, January 28, 2008
New radio system - cooperation at its finest
When I first became a Lucas County Commissioner, many of the lessons learned from Sept. 11, 2001, in terms of what local governments needed to do in order to better prepare, were recommendations waiting to be implemented.
Interoperability - the focus of allowing all law enforcement, fire and first responders to communicate seamlessly - was one of them.
Through the emphasis of Sheriff James Telb, the weapons of mass destruction task force, the 9-1-1 emergency phone system committee and all local fire and police chiefs, interoperability is here.
The commissioners supported the recommendations from the various groups that federal funds coming into Lucas County be dedicated toward this system (along with personal protective equipment for all first responders). Portions of the 9-1-1 Levy were also targeted for this function.
Land was purchased or leased or dedicated for the towers necessary to the system and all jurisdictions got a portion of the costs for their individual radios paid for.
The critical point was that everyone had to be a part of the system, for without total support from all jurisdictions, the goal of everyone being able to talk to each would not be accomplished.
Many politicians in this area talk about 'regional cooperation.' But they often fail to recognize the excellent cooperative efforts that already exist, especially in the courts, law enforcement and fire/first responder areas. It was truly refreshing to participate in the various groups and committees and see them all agree that, as important as their individual needs were, the overall community - including the people they represented - would be better served by having this capability.
It's been a long process to review the various types of 800 MHz systems, decide on a particular one and a company to provide it, locate the towers, agree upon the radios, coordinate with all the cities, villages and townships to purchase the radios, pay for the system and then bring everyone on line. But it was worth it to have everyone in the county on one system.
Kudos to all those involved in the process and to the local police and fire agencies who supported it and agreed to participate!
Interoperability - the focus of allowing all law enforcement, fire and first responders to communicate seamlessly - was one of them.
Through the emphasis of Sheriff James Telb, the weapons of mass destruction task force, the 9-1-1 emergency phone system committee and all local fire and police chiefs, interoperability is here.
The commissioners supported the recommendations from the various groups that federal funds coming into Lucas County be dedicated toward this system (along with personal protective equipment for all first responders). Portions of the 9-1-1 Levy were also targeted for this function.
Land was purchased or leased or dedicated for the towers necessary to the system and all jurisdictions got a portion of the costs for their individual radios paid for.
The critical point was that everyone had to be a part of the system, for without total support from all jurisdictions, the goal of everyone being able to talk to each would not be accomplished.
Many politicians in this area talk about 'regional cooperation.' But they often fail to recognize the excellent cooperative efforts that already exist, especially in the courts, law enforcement and fire/first responder areas. It was truly refreshing to participate in the various groups and committees and see them all agree that, as important as their individual needs were, the overall community - including the people they represented - would be better served by having this capability.
It's been a long process to review the various types of 800 MHz systems, decide on a particular one and a company to provide it, locate the towers, agree upon the radios, coordinate with all the cities, villages and townships to purchase the radios, pay for the system and then bring everyone on line. But it was worth it to have everyone in the county on one system.
Kudos to all those involved in the process and to the local police and fire agencies who supported it and agreed to participate!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
