Prince William considers budget cuts
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
By Cheryl Chumley
Published: November 4, 2008
For Prince William libraries, a 10 percent cut in fiscal 2010 funding would mean those requesting certain records may have to wait an extra day or two.
But for police, that 10 percent cut means the abolition of Neighborhood Watch, crime prevention education and the entire bike patrol team.
Basic police response service drops even more at 20 percent, and all but the most essential of training and develop-ment are eliminated at 30 percent.
The scenarios were part and parcel of Friday's daylong meeting of supervisors, staffers and departmental officials to discuss the county's economic outlook and take preliminary steps toward offsetting a projected fiscal 2010 shortfall of $82 million. The schools, meanwhile, face a $108 million gap for this same budget year.
"We are not facing deficits in the current fiscal year," said Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart, R-at-large. "We are facing how to plan for the next fiscal year."
One obvious way is to consider cuts. As such, department heads were asked to present supervisors with the out-comes of budget cuts in various ranges. At worst, police could see stopping all "quality control of case inves-tigations for prosecution" and the subsequent compromise in the ability to obtain court convictions; the elimi-nation of proactive patrols and criminal suppression programs; and a diminished emergency response system as officers are forced to respond only "to those calls that appear to be the most serious," according to briefing documents.
A 33 percent cut in funding for the Adult Detention Center, meanwhile, translates into significant cuts in staffing: 31 from the ADC, 47 from the modular jail and 21 from the work release and electronic monitoring program, according to presented statistics.
Other departments presenting best-guesses for various funding cuts: Finance, which claimed a 33 percent budget drop, could leave the office vulnerable at audit time; the Human Rights Commission, which reported that 10 percent budget decreases would immediately cut funding for an administrative staffer, while a 33 percent budget drop would only leave enough money for a part-time investigator; and the Registrar, which reported the potential to lose five full-time employees if the budget was cut by 33 percent.
A 20 percent at the Registrar's Office would still result in the elimination of an assistant's position, according to financial projections from the department.
These were but a few of the scenarios painted; several other departments reported similar
outcomes.
But county staff and supervisors have yet to make any decisions—the information was for discussion purposes only and will be fine-tuned by December, when the board is due to receive actual budget guidance from executive staff.
The county administrator's proposed budget won't come out until February.
Staff writer Cheryl Chumley can be reached at 703-670-1907.
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.

Reader Reactions
Posted by ( mmarin ) on November 04, 2008 at 7:46 pm
$1M sounds about right per year. And, its a drop in the bucket when you look at the yearly school budget.
If you look at certain teachers salaries, admin salaries, and capital costs over the years…there is MORE than enough fat to cut from the budget.
Will it be popular? Nope. But, it’s what’s right.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( edbrm1 ) on November 04, 2008 at 9:24 am
Cost is from continued retraining of teachers, consumables, buying for 5th grade next year when we already have the previous text books etc.
Doesn’t matter but how come they have a budget shortfall when my property taxes keep going up? The value goes down so they increase the rate.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Posts as Pinko ) on November 04, 2008 at 9:15 am
—The savings would be about $1 million per year.—
Curious where you are getting that number. I’m also curious why you said it wasn’t approved when it WAS approved long ago. I’m not saying you aren’t right about the academics of it (I can’t tell, to be honest, because I have a problem learning math anyway), but I don’t believe replacing the books, materials and curriculum plus re-training teachers at this point would save us any money.
I think we should cut some of the BOCS’s fringe benefits. Make all their salaries the same. Have Stewart give us back the money we lost when he sent out his personal invites to the public to attend a meeting and then tried to tell us we only got one minute to speak. While we’re at it, let’s set HIS personal tax rate higher. Better yet—put him on a cop beat for a month or so where he has little backup and is forced to work longer hours. Let’s see how he fairs. While he’s at it, he can live off food stamps.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( edbrm1 ) on November 04, 2008 at 9:03 am
Because it costs a lot more than the previous program for negative benefit and was not approved, it was rammed down our throats by the current superintendent.
The savings would be about $1 million per year.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Posts as Pinko ) on November 04, 2008 at 8:50 am
—They could start by cutting out Math Investigations and Connected math in the schools.—
And how is THAT going to save anyone money, especially when the program was already approved years ago and now fully implemented? Yours is an academic concern, not a fiscal one.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( edbrm1 ) on November 04, 2008 at 8:47 am
They could start by cutting out Math Investigations and Connected math in the schools. Expensive worthless edu-fad.
There will be a demo this afternoon at McCoart. Stop by.
pwcteachmathright.com
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Posts as Pinko ) on November 04, 2008 at 8:46 am
—We need to advocate cuts to education, public safety and social programs.—
Yeah RIGHT. Then when our streets are full of criminals, the mentally ill, the disabled, the high school dropouts, troubled kids and poor families, we can thank you and the BOCS.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( mmarin ) on November 04, 2008 at 8:11 am
I think what he means is that current obligations are covered and that this budget planning process is for the next fiscal year and going forward.
Brush aside the scare tactics of what ‘services’ we will lose. We need these spending cuts. Even a 30% cut will still just put us back to where we were just a few years ago. So, don’t buy into this bunk that the sky is falling.
We need to advocate cuts to education, public safety and social programs.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Posts as Pinko ) on November 04, 2008 at 7:30 am
—“We are not facing deficits in the current fiscal year,“ said Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart, R-at-large. “We are facing how to plan for the next fiscal year.“—
What kind of double-speak is this? He is making CUTS because there is a DEFICIT. Once again, Stewart proves we can’t trust him.
Report Inappropriate Comment