Cecil County Commish Do Charter Cha-Cha On Funds for Transition to New Form of Government
The Cecil County commissioners had a dance party Tuesday, performing their version of the Charter Cha Cha as they tried out different steps before deciding to abandon the dance altogether. After tossing around various numbers, the usual 3-2 majority decided that no money should be set aside as a contingency for unforeseen expenses in the transition to charter government later this year.
County Budget Director Craig Whiteford put the music on the stereo, suggesting a $500,000 set-aside out of currently unallocated county reserve funds for unforeseen possible costs associated with the transition to charter government after this November’s elections. Since the county is about to close its books on the current fiscal year, he suggested that the commissioners provide budgetary “guidance” on carrying over a Charter costs set-aside into the new budget year that begins on July 1.
Whiteford pointed out that none of the money could be spent without the commissioners—or the new County Council/County Executive who will be in charge as of December—voting to approve a budget amendment to transfer the money from an “unassigned” category to actual expenditures under the budget.
Step, step, three steps in place: cha cha cha.
Commissioner Diana Broomell (R-4) hit the dance floor first, saying she didn’t like the music but would do a few small steps: $15,000 only to cover possible consultations with the lawyer who is an expert on charter government and who had advised the citizens’ panel that crafted the charter document.
Broomell, who strongly opposed the shift to charter government that was approved overwhelmingly by county voters in 2010, said charter was “sold” to the voters as being cost-neutral or even cheaper than the current Commissioner form of government. She said she was concerned the money could be used as “an excuse to increase government.”
Broomell lost her bid for the new County Executive position in the April Republican primary. However, she still has two years left on her current commissioner term and will have a seat on the new County Council.
Commissioner Tari Moore (R-2), who won the GOP primary for county executive, said that $15,000 was not adequate and the commissioners needed to make sure “the transition to charter government is successful.”
“It’s not a cookie jar…it’s not a slush fund,” said Commissioner Robert Hodge (R-5), who is a candidate in November to retain his seat on the new County Council. “In reality, this is an accounting principle” and “it is good budgetary sense” to plan ahead for possible unforeseen costs in the transition process. He said there were still many unanswered questions, such as legal services that will be required by the County Council and the new Executive.
Commissioner James Mullin (R-1), who lost his Republican primary for re-election and will be out of a job after the November election, said he was “not a fan of this big number…I’m probably a fan of deleting it.”
However, he then suggested a figure of $100,000, and Moore and Hodge indicated they would accept that figure. But then, the music speeded up and the cha-cha-ing got a bit messy.
First, the commissioners voted on Broomell’s plan for a limited $15,000 allocation but it failed as Hodge, Moore and Mullin voted no while Broomell and Commissioner Michael Dunn (R-3) supported it.
One, two, cha cha cha…
Then Moore picked up on Mullin’s suggestion for a $100,000 allocation and made a motion to approve that figure, which Hodge also endorsed. But Mullin surprised her by voting against the $100,000, joined by Broomell and Dunn. One, two, cha cha cha…
“I’m confused,” Moore said, pointing out that Mullin had proposed the figure he then voted against.
“I threw it out for discussion,” Mullin explained.
Then, Mullin offered a motion to delete all money for Charter transition and Broomell and Dunn joined him with their votes. Hodge and Moore voted no.
One, two, cha cha cha…
“I’m just going to say it,” Moore began, “What I sense is you’re trying to strangle the government moving forward” and setting up Charter government to “fail.”
In practical terms, the fate of future expenditures to facilitate the transition to Charter government depends more on the outcome of the November election than the decision Tuesday to delete the budget set-aside.
Moore faces Democrat Pam Howard, the former county Treasurer, in the general election for county executive, and both Moore and Howard have been committed to making Charter work smoothly. But the future make-up of the County Council could determine whether funds are made available for possible transition expenses.
Hodge is facing Democrat James Crouse, the former Elkton mayor, in November. Dr. Alan McCarthy is running as a Republican against a little-known Democrat, Pamela Bailey, in District 1. Hodge and McCarthy are strong supporters of the Charter form of government.
If Moore wins as County Executive, her Council seat will be filled from a list of three candidates submitted by the Republican Central Committee, which is controlled by the Smipkin political machine, led by Del. Michael Smigiel and Sen. E.J. Pipkin, both R-36, who vehemently opposed charter government.
Coupled with Dunn and Broomell, a Smipkin-picked Council member would be expected to oppose any spending that would advance the cause of Charter, in a slightly re-aligned version of the current “Three Amigos” voting bloc.
As the old Fred Astaire song and dance goes, “I won’t dance, don’t ask me…”
Surprise, surprise, surprise. The three Amigos, two of whom were resoundly defeated back in the spring, are all voting in lock step – as they have been directed from on high – to obstruct, obstruct, obstruct and do all in their power to make Charter fail.
The voters of Cecil County overwhelmingly shot down the entire Smipkin slate (Broomell, Mullin, MAD Mike, and Papa Bear Smigiel) in variious elections this spring. The voters are wise to their ways and are tired of their power grabbing manipulation. Charter was voted in by a LARGE majority of Cecil County – as the Smipkins are fond of saying after each defeat, “well the voters have spoken,” now is the time to respect and follow your own words and quit trying to shut down Charter before it ever begins.
Just wondering, if Broomell had won the Republican primary for County Executive, how much money do you think she would have requested and directed her voting block to approve of ? I’m pretty sure it would have been far more than the $15,000 she supported. That amount likely would not have even touched the legal bills she would incur.
I was serious in a previous post when I suggested Cecil county needs to adopt a procedure in this new charter government that allows for a recall option. The games that Broomell, Mullins, & Dunn are playing (yes, it is a GAME to them), are an embarrassment to our county. Their actions are too calculated to be called negligent; unfortunately for us taxpayers, they more resemble conspiratorial fraud, or outright incompetence.
Note to Tari Moore or Pamela Howard – please add a recall function to the bylaws of this new charter government when you become C.E. This problem is bigger than Democrat or Republican partisanship, and both sides should recognize how much these last two years hurt this county.
Mullin, the only one at the table who will definitely not be at the table when charter government begins, offerred the motion for no transition funds, even a paltry $15,000 for legal advice. The Three Amigos then voted in their normal block. Gee, they voted to pay for legal advice on the Artesian debacle after Broomell incurred the personal expense without authorization from the other commissioners. A different Smipkin at the table won’t make a difference since the County Executive can veto their nonsense and they would need four votes to override. The Three Amigos now giggle while Cecil burns.
Rick, yes, it indeed would take four votes to override an executive veto. And the executive’s veto power would stop a lot of the foolishness and do-overs we’ve seen these past two years.
But what about positive steps the executive wants to take but cannot muster a three vote majority to accomplish? So the exec feels it is in the county’s best interests to, say, consult a lawyer and pay some fees for expert advice on charter or some other matter– but the new Amigos refuse. Stalemate.
Don’t know the limits on County Exec’s ability to seek legal advice. It is probably discretionary within the Exec’s portion of the budget. Stalemate is better than the Broomell dictatorship aided and abetted by Mullin and Dunn.
I would like to see a breakdown of what the money would be used for. If you know you have 500K slack then you are more likely not to be as cautious with your expenditures. One thing is right, the briefings done to sell charter all stated that charter would be cheaper. We will see!
I agree, Joe. $500,000 seems like an arbitrary number. Although $15,000 is a ridiculously low amount, almost to the point of vindictive. I would like to know specifically what this amount of money is set aside for. That would be the responsible thing to do.
Charter was supposed to be cheaper. Bottom line! Thank you.
That information was wrong. The Charter Board never stated it would be cheaper. Cost-neutral, yes. Cheaper, no.
Phillip,
I was at a Friends of Charter meeting in Colora, and the presentation clearly showed the government to cost less. I was suspicious of the figure though.