Chesterfield and others bracing for revenue shortfall

Chesterfield and others bracing for revenue shortfall

2007 / TIMES-DISPATCH

Students move to their buses at Thomas Dale High School, in Chesterfield County. State budget cuts mean $2.1 million less than expected for the county.

» 27 Comments | Post a Comment

Chesterfield County is projecting a $4 million pinch on its current fiscal year's budget because of state cuts.

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine last month announced a fiscal 2010 budget-reduction plan that will mean about $1.5 billion worth of cuts in state spending. As a result, Chesterfield officials expect to see at least $3.85 million less than expected from the state for the county's $716 million general fund.

The state cutbacks have local governments in the region looking for ways to save in this year's budget while bracing for deeper cuts in the budget that will take effect July 1.

Hanover County estimates it will lose $461,000 in state revenues this year, but that doesn't include likely reductions in sales-tax revenues for schools, Deputy County Administrator Joseph P. Casey said.

In Henrico County, finance officials say they have no plans to estimate cuts needed in this year's budget until after Kaine proposes his two-year budget in December, along with revisions to this year's state budget.

Henrico already expects a reduction in local real estate tax revenue of more than $20 million next year. The county is likely to propose changes to this year's budget next week to reflect reductions in state and local revenues.

"We do anticipate some sort of downward revision," Finance Director John A. Vithoulkas said last week.

In Richmond, officials estimate the city ended the last budget year in the black, despite getting about $8.1 million less in revenue, according to preliminary projections from the fourth quarter.

Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Marcus D. Jones estimates the city ended the year by spending about $12.4 million less than budgeted, but he cautions that the figures will not translate to a $4.3 million year-end surplus because some expenses will occur later.

Looking to this fiscal year, officials already are bracing for a $4.6 million loss in revenue from sales and business license taxes, but Jones adds that the budget picture is far from complete.

"With the state alone, it's going to be a challenge," he said, referring to state revenue reductions.

In Chesterfield, the state cuts mean $2.1 million less than expected in state sales tax for the county, all of which would have gone to the school system. In addition, the county will see almost $600,000 less in aid for local police operations and $326,000 less in sheriff's office funding.

Other Chesterfield offices affected by the state cuts include the commissioner of revenue's office ($144,000); commonwealth's attorney's office ($162,000); circuit court clerk's office ($146,000); and the treasurer's office ($144,000).

Now, Chesterfield faces the decision of how much of the shortfall -- if not all of it -- to cover with local money.

"How we overcome this has not been decided," said Allan Carmody, the county budget and management director. "We have not told the police department to cut their budget $600,000."

School officials expect to make up the $2.1 million shortfall through anticipated savings in other areas, such as fuel for buses and turnover of staff, whose jobs will be left vacant.

Midlothian District Supervisor Daniel A. Gecker said it's possible the county could find money to help cover the rest of the shortfall through similar savings and by holding open vacancies.

"But does it make long-term sense to cover it in those ways, or is now the time to start absorbing the cuts?" he asked. "That's a conversation we need to have."

The current fiscal year budget problems are a sign of more pain to come.

"This is certainly an indicator of where we're going to be going into next year's budget process," Gecker said. "We're anticipating increasingly higher amounts being withheld by the state."

The county already has projected a $38 million shortfall for fiscal 2011 based on an estimated $20 million decrease in revenue and an additional $18 million in spending.

"We have real concerns about the implications of further state reductions in the next fiscal year and trying to find a balance in those likely reductions and maintaining service levels," Carmody said.


Contact Wesley P. Hester at (804) 649-6976 or .


Contact Michael Martz at (804) 649-6964 or .

Staff writer Will Jones contributed to this report.

Advertisement

 
View More: tim kaine,henrico county,hanover county,governor,editors picks,city of richmond,chesterfield county,budget,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by anonymous on October 19, 2009 at 10:32 pm

freedom101,
I stand corrected.  You are correct in saying that VDOT is suppose to do snow removal in Chesterfield. 
In so far as this neighborhood is concerned, when the snow and ice melts, problem solved.
For a county whose real estate base is higher than Henrico’s, their services are substandard.  They do not even provide trash pick up.  We have to pay a private refuse company or go to the landfill and pay there.  I pay a private company, who has not raised their rates in the last 4 or 5 years.  Other companies have had increases but not this independant operator. 
If I did not have so money sunk into this house that I will never be able to recoup, I would move.

Flag Comment Posted by Hmmm on October 19, 2009 at 9:29 pm

Posted by ( TravisBickle ) on October 19, 2009 at 9:06 am

In Chesterfield, the state cuts mean…the county will see almost $600,000 less in aid for local police operations.

I suppose the program that deploys traffic cops who direct vehicular traffic in and out of The Boulders beginning at 5:00 PM is a wise place to start cutting. This program of wasteful spending and misuse of resources has continued long enough anyway. Would not a traffic signal or two be less costly in the long run? Or is the roadway too poorly engineered to permit signalization?

The Boulders pays for off-duty police officers to direct traffic at these locations.  There is no cost to the County or its taxpayers.  Cutting this would not save a dime, simply inconvenience people trying to drive on this stretch of road when the office buildings are letting out.

Why would you put up a traffic signal to solve a problem that occurs for 30 minutes on five days a week?

Flag Comment Posted by freedom101 on October 19, 2009 at 9:26 pm

Oh you silly, silly people. Before you complain about how poorly Chesterfield is run, you should really know your facts. It’s VDOT that maintains your roads during a snow storm, NOT Chesterfield. Tisk tisk. Some people are never happy…

Flag Comment Posted by TravisBickle on October 19, 2009 at 8:06 am

In Chesterfield, the state cuts mean…the county will see almost $600,000 less in aid for local police operations.

I suppose the program that deploys traffic cops who direct vehicular traffic in and out of The Boulders beginning at 5:00 PM is a wise place to start cutting. This program of wasteful spending and misuse of resources has continued long enough anyway. Would not a traffic signal or two be less costly in the long run? Or is the roadway too poorly engineered to permit signalization?

Flag Comment Posted by oneuser on October 18, 2009 at 7:16 pm

I see you STILL don’t know what you are talking about. Later

Flag Comment Posted by Jack on October 18, 2009 at 6:15 pm

oneuser you still don’t get it. Just who do you think paid for the impact you made in 1956? We did. If you and the many thousands of others had not flocked to chesterfield we would still be a pristine rural county. Not the urban congested jungle with outrageous taxes and fees and now sadly the crime and violence.

Get off your high horse and admit that you are part of the problem not just the ones wanting to come here. We paid for you so you can well pay for others.  I guarantee that you have paid nothing close to what your impact has been so you need to take that into account when trashing others wanting to come. Or is it you want them to take up and pay what you didn’t? Obama thinking at it’s best. Unless Chesterfield citizens have fully paid for their total impact since moving to Chesterfield they really should not cast stones.

You and others blame developers. If there wasn’t a market they would not build. Just as you were in the market in 1956.

Flag Comment Posted by oneuser on October 18, 2009 at 5:52 pm

OK Jack You got me! I have lived here since 1956 so put that in your pipe and smoke it.That’s 53 years to you since you are admittedly so dense.
It is not selfish to expect new houses to pay their own way, If the county does not get enough revenue off the new home the other taxpayers pick up the difference.This welfare for builders has been going on too long in Chesterfield. The county can no longer afford to keep paying for the improvements needed by the new homes. The free ride is over and the money is gone.

Flag Comment Posted by Jack on October 18, 2009 at 2:22 pm

Nothing to explain

You’re right there because you can’t explain your selfish position. You haven’t paid anywhere near your share of your impact yet constantly call for everyone else who desires to live in Chesterfield to do.

I think the county should enact a tax on all homes built after 1960 and force you loafers to pay your share.

Just think we could build new schools and eliminate trailers. We could increase teacher pay and benefits. We could build roads to handle our traffic caused by the come-heres after 1960.

What about it oneuser care to pay your share or just post here wanting others to pay it for you?

Flag Comment Posted by oneuser on October 18, 2009 at 1:57 pm

Nothing to explain, Sorry your are so dense. If you do not get it by now you never will.

Flag Comment Posted by Jack on October 18, 2009 at 11:54 am

Posted by ( oneuser ) on October 17, 2009 at 6:38 pm

I am glad that builders have slowed on building in Chesterfield. You cannot build your way out of a situation where it cost the county far more for the improvements than they will get from the real estate taxes on the new homes built. This is why the county needs to raise the cash proffers to an amount equal or exceeding the cost of the improvements we as taxpayers have to currently pay. It is only fair

Why don’t you explain to us dense citizens just how this is a fact? New residents are no more of a burden than you were when you moved to Chesterfield. Have you paid your so-called “fair share”. Not likely.

I’ve said before a special “impact” tax should be assessed on all houses built after 1960 for the severe economic impact the cased the county and it’s long-time native citizens. After all “it would only be fair”....

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement