County budget reflects hard realities of today’s economy

Mahoning County commis- sioners Thursday adopted an austere budget, one that represents real cuts in the money available to general-fund departments compared to actual expenditures in 2008 and 2009.

The action is an emphatic recognition by the board of commissioners that times are changing. It will, however, be up to the other elected county officials whose operations are supported by the general fund to at least live within the budgets provided — or even go a step beyond.

The budget reflects a dramatic decrease in county income, based largely on lower receipts from the county’s 1 percent sales tax. In tough times, people don’t buy things — especially big-ticket items — and when that happens, tax receipts go in the tank. This is not a Mahoning County phenomenon. The state collected $685 million less in sales taxes in 2009 than the year before. Sales tax receipts fell in 75 of Ohio’s 88 counties, and some of the few that saw increases did so because voters approved higher tax rates or new taxes.

The problem of reduced revenue is not new, and it is not one that will disappear overnight. Recovering from the deep national recession is going to take years, and it will take longer in some places than others.

Dramatic cuts

The Mahoning County budget numbers are quite dramatic. Commissioners approved a general fund budget of $51.7 million. That is more than $9.3 million less than the actual expenditures in 2009. And the 2009 expenditures were more than $6.4 million less than had been spent in 2008.

The 2010 budget represents a cut of nearly 25 percent from the actual expenditures of 2008.

Given those numbers, it is clear that the county is continuing to provide vital services and doing so with less. Are there other areas to cut? We suppose so, but credit for responding to the county’s fiscal crisis must be given where it is due.

Commissioners made heavy cuts in some departments, but comparatively modest trims in allocations to the courts. That’s a recognition of the sad fact of political life in Ohio. Courts have the ultimate escape clause in budgetary matters; they can appeal cuts to the Ohio Supreme Court when they believe their funding is inadequate, and the High Court is almost invariably sympathetic. It is an irritation to the taxpayers and to other departments, but not the largest issue facing the county now.

It’s a federal case

Far larger is the need for county officials to work out an accommodation with the federal court in Akron over a consent decree that requires the county to operate the misdemeanor facility and fully staff the entire county jail. The court should work with the county and with Youngstown to replace incarceration of nonviolent offenders with alternative sentences, such as electronically monitored house arrest. Cutting down the waiting time for criminal trials will also help empty the jail because once a felon is convicted, he or she is transferred to a state penitentiary. That, however, is going to become more difficult because the prosecutor’s office is being hit by budget cuts as well.

While there are still numerous questions to be answered in how the county is going to work its way through this crisis, one thing is clear. Every officeholder and every department now has a budget, and all must begin adjusting to the demands of those budgets immediately.

No office should continue doing business as usual, banking on an upturn in the economy that would provide additional revenue at the end of the year. That isn’t going to happen. Making five layoffs today is preferable to having to make 10 layoffs in August or 20 in November.

Living within a budget is easier said than done, but it’s far easier if done sooner rather than later.