Virginia budget outlook poor; shortfall could grow
Del. Lacey E. Putney, I-Bedford, listened during a budget meeting yesterday in Richmond.
Related Info
RICHMOND, Va. -- The bad economy will result in another $250 million to $300 million budget shortfall for the fiscal year ending June 30, House of Delegates money committees were told yesterday.
This would be on top of the $1.3 billion revenue shortage predicted in August and bring total revenues down from earlier forecasts by more than $6 billion since March 2007.
Grim state budget writers heard the bad news at a retreat at the General Assembly Building and then began pondering what state programs to cut.
Del. Lacey E. Putney, I-Bedford, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, made it clear that he would not tolerate a tax increase. That "would just further burden the consumers during this economic downturn," he said.
Putney said he wants members of the House to propose reducing or eliminating specific programs.
"What I don't want is generalized statements of cutting waste and eliminating inefficiency," he said. "Neither of those is a line item in the state budget."
And, if members come to the budget committee with a proposal to increase spending, they must propose a corresponding amendment to reduce spending, Putney said.
The retreat -- a two-day, numbers-crunching budget review by the House Appropriations Committee -- usually is held out of town, in a member's district. It was held in Richmond in a state building to save rental fees, committee director Robert P. Vaughn said. Members of the House Finance Committee also attended.
Total state revenues fell 8 percent in October compared with the October 2008 total, a memorandum by state Secretary of Finance Richard D. Brown said. In the first four months of this fiscal year, which began in July, they are down 7.6 percent.
Asked by Del. Joe T. May, R-Loudoun, whether the budget writers should feel "glad, sad, cautiously optimistic or cautiously pessimistic," Jeffrey M. Lacker, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, answered "all of the above."
The reduced revenues will be in the 2010 fiscal year, which ends June 30.
The General Assembly will have to deal with that budget situation when it returns to Richmond in January but also must adopt a budget for the fiscal years 2011 and 2012.
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine will propose the two-year budget shortly before he leaves office. Kaine took steps in August to make budget cuts because of the $1.3 billion shortage at that time.
Vaughn projected a 3.8 percent growth in general-fund revenues in fiscal 2011 and a 5.3 percent growth in fiscal 2012. These are well below historic growth rates.
Budget-reduction strategies suggested by Vaughn include across-the-board cuts of 15 percent at state agencies. Kaine reduced some, but not all, state agencies by 10 percent in August. In public safety, a 15 percent cut would involve cutting 140 state troopers and 1,300 prison beds. In health and human resources, this would reduce local services to 5,834 mentally disabled clients and reduce 426 direct care staff at mental health hospitals, he said.
Vaughn warned that the task before the budget writers will not be easy.
"All low-hanging fruit has been picked," he said.
Two budget committee members suggested possible unpicked fruit.
Del. Clarence E. Phillips, D-Dickenson, said the General Assembly should meet 45 days rather than its scheduled 60 days to save money. Del. Algie T. Howell Jr., D-Norfolk, said school systems could save gas money by not letting their buses idle while waiting to take home children from school.
Contact Tyler Whitley at (804) 649-6780 or
.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
AG, okay, I’m not sure how a recession would affect a NST any more than the way a recession affects the current tax system..
To address your tired, old, worn out claim that this would unfairly affect the “poor” (sigh), tell me, how would “the rich” (whoever they are) get any richer and the “poor” get any poorer? For example, if the NST is 10% and a “rich” person bought a $100,000 Lexus, he/she would have to pay a sales tax of $10,000 for that purchase. If a “poor” person bought a $12,000 Hyundai, the he/she would pay only $1,200 in taxes. While this is certainly not equal, it is most certainly fair. And keep in mind, there’s a big difference between “equal” and “fair”. Ask any parent of more than one child. You treat your children fairly but not always equally.
Perhaps the State should consider re-visiting their mandated 50K and below set aside requirments - just a thought?
dklee: Also you don’t have to fire the employee “take the phone away” or only allow the phone to be used during work hours.
truth&justice;:
I have thought the same thing for 35 years. It is the dumbest rule the state has. Can’t tell you the number of times I have seen stuff purchased not because it was needed but to spend the money at the end of the fiscal year.
Changing the year end spending and getting rid of NG would be very helpful.
dklee: City and state employees can be fired if their management has the guts to do so. If an employee’s phone bill is consistently not what it should be and he or she has been warned by management and the warnings documented then let the firing begin. It all comes down to the manager(s)and how much work they are willing to do.
unless the manager(s) are also miss using their government phone.
Yes
AG, what “proposal” are you talking about? Is this about a National Sales Tax to replace the current income tax?
State agencies have a wasteful philosophy in that you need to “ use it or loose it” at the end of a budget cycle. We should reward an agency for having surpluses by allowing them to maintain indiviual, transparent, rainy day funds. Therefore, if your agency is fiscally responcible an incentive awaits. Why should one agency pay for another’s waste at the taxpayer’s expense?
Dandy, under your scenario, what happens during a recession? Will the government have to shut down?
Also, your proposal would promote the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. Is that acceptable to you?
Are we serious about loosing that many state troopers? In the wake of the Va Tech shootings, I can’t believe this is even on the table. We’ve been riding a high horse for while and now it’s time to make hard decisions, but laying off troopers is not one. Good police work costs money, bad police work costs more. Trooper numbers have never kept up with population anyway. Staffing in most areas is the same as it was in the sixties. I’d like to hear what my fellow Virginians think, so sound off.
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.


Advertisement