When budgets fall short, cuts have to be made

A story in Saturday's Vindicator reported in matter of fact fashion that several departments in Trumbull County government are on track to exceed their allotted budgets in 2004. Some are looking at deficits of tens of thousands of dollars.
Under Ohio law, the county is not permitted to spend more money than it has. The implications seem clear. Departments that are running up deficits are either going to have to make modest cuts now to bring their budgets into line or increase their revenue so as to balance their budgets by the end of the year. Or they could sit back and hope that toward the end of the year the county will have enough money in various funds that some of it can be reallocated to their prodigal departments. But if that gambit fails, they will face debilitating layoffs at year's end.
Pretend it's you
Let's put it in terms of a hypothetical taxpayer's budget problems. Let's say John Q. Public knew he was going to have a net income of $24,000 for the year. That gives him $6,000 a quarter. At the end of March, he realizes he's spent $7,000.
At that rate, he'll be out of money in mid-November. He'll have nothing for food, mortgage or rent, utilities or transportation, much less niceties or luxuries. Finding a second job might be an option, but let's assume jobs are tight or he's already working as many hours as he can.
At that point the prudent taxpayer would look for less painful ways of balancing his budget over the next seven months so as to avoid being penniless by Thanksgiving.
We didn't get the impression from Saturday's story that Trumbull County officeholders have yet seen themselves in the shoes of our hypothetical taxpayer. Maybe some whose views were not represented have started making cuts, but we wouldn't bet any of Mr. Taxpayer's dwindling resources on that.
Sheriff Thomas Altiere said he's aware of the shortfall in his department and has already met with a commissioner to see if more money can be found. He also said he hopes that he can increase his department's income by taking in more federal inmates, for which the county is paid.
County Auditor David Hines noted that many departments are required by law to provide certain services, and their staffs cannot be cut much further. That may be true, but it also equally true that the lion's share of the county's budget goes toward salaries and fringe benefits, and if the cuts aren't made there, departments that are overspending their budgets now will run out of money.
Hoping for more
And county Administrator Tony Carson noted that the county's estimated income is subject to change through the year, and it is his understanding that the county's sales tax income is running somewhat higher than had been expected. If, indeed, the local economy grows and people spend more, the county might squeak through this year (unless a 0.5 percent sales tax that voters allowed to expire is restored for 2005, however, the county will face a financial crisis next year).
We would suggest that every department that is on track to exceed its budget allocation -- regardless of how heavily mandated its services may be or how thinly stretched it already is -- must begin making modest cuts. Hoping for increased revenue or looking for ways to rob Peter to pay Paul at year's end is not responsible governance.