News Subscribe  to Our Newsletter Sign  up for Email Updates CGF  In the News Press  Inquiries Past  Articles Calendar			Budget  cuts hit home  San Mateo County Supervisor Rich Gordon discusses local effects of State  budget by Rich  Gordon Already  reeling from previous budget cuts, parks, resource management and long  range planning can expect further hits this year. All of us who care about  these quality-of-life issues must hope that these are not knockout blows. This June when the San  Mateo County Board of Supervisors adopts a budget, there will be major  changes in the way County government operates. The February 2004 projection  is that there will be a gap of $80 million between anticipated revenues  and projected expenses. The Board must close that gap and, by law, adopt  a balanced budget. It may be instructive to understand how the $80 million  gap was created. The Governor's  January 2004 budget cuts reduced the flow of state revenue to the County  by $49 million. The remaining $31 million represents the increased cost  of doing business, with negotiated salary and benefits packages for employees  and retirees accounting for most of the increase. The most harmful of the Governor's budget reductions is his proposal to take property tax from the County to support the state's requirement to fund schools. Prior to 1993, the County was guaranteed 24 cents of every locally collected property tax dollar. In that year, in order to deal with a deficit in state government, the legislature and the governor reduced the county government's share of the local property tax to 14 cents of each dollar. The new proposal shifts an additional 3 cents, reducing the County share to only 11 cents of every property tax dollar. County governments use property tax revenue as their  primary mechanism for funding non-mandated programs. While the need to  reduce expenses will impact all areas of County government, I fear for  parks and recreation, resource management and long-range planning -- discretionary  programs that are most heavily impacted by cuts made during the current  economic downturn. We have reduced ranger coverage and deferred maintenance  of County  parks. Without sufficient staff, we have had difficulty managing some  of the park and water bond grants we have received. A lack of matching  funds has kept us from being competitive for other grant programs. The  list of pending or delayed long-range planning projects continues to grow  -- including important neighborhood rezoning studies, community design  reviews and watershed corridor projects. By exercising restraint, San Mateo County built up a reserve during the good economic times. That reserve, however, is in no way sufficient to pull us out of the present problem. A growing economy would help, but most importantly we need a structural reform in the way that local government is funded. County governments need a guaranteed source of income that we can control. Local property and sales taxes should be linked to local service needs. While I am pessimistic about the possibility of making  such structural reforms at the state level, I am very optimistic about  one effort to secure a local funding source. I congratulate the Committee  for Green Foothills and advocates for parks on the effort  to create a countywide park district with a dedicated local funding  source. The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors has endorsed legislation  that would help make such a district a reality. There is a long way to  go before this effort will bear fruit, but we must plant the seeds now  to gain greater local control. I urge you to monitor these  issues so that we can ensure that these essential services are not  diminished. Published March 2004 in Green  Footnotes. Read the related  article in this same issue, San Mateo County seeks new funding source  for parks. Page last updated March 8, 2004 .

	Photo courtesy Rich Gordon.