How the Budget Process Played OutThroughout the monthlongback and forthbudget writing processin Montgomery County,members of the CountyCouncil were reminded almost daily thatthe actions they take have consequenceson a human level. <strong>Local</strong> <strong>1994</strong> memberscrowded into the Council hearing roomat every public meeting to bear witness tothe politicians. Polite and solemn, unionmembers sent messages to the Council,sometimes with placards, sometimes withjeers and boos. The sentiments expressedfell roughly into three categories: “<strong>We</strong>’rewatching.” “The County works because wedo.” “<strong>We</strong> vote.”<strong>Local</strong> <strong>1994</strong> members were joined byteachers, police officers, fire fighters,minority groups, families, elderly anddisabled residents—all stakeholders in theCounty’s present and future.Undoubtedly, this daily presenceunnerved some Council members andchanged minds about what to cut andwhere to cut it. The threat of a 10-day“Everyone on our side hadaccepted the inevitable need forsome pain, but we absolutelyinsisted that it be doled outon a more equitable basis.Unfortunately, the Council stillbacked away from many of thetough decisions.”—Gino Rennefurlough imposed exclusively on Countygeneral government workers was changedto a more progressive (although stillpainful) sliding scale of furloughs, withworkers at the lowest pay levels enduring24-hour furloughs while those earningmore than $100,000 were hit for 64 hours.A majority on the Council reversedthe executive’s proposal that would havecost school health room aides (all women,many single mothers) a permanent 14percent of their pay.The Council’s majority also backedoff from elimination of many of the RideOn bus routes, saving 12 of the 34 routesplanned for reduced or eliminated service.The Council, after <strong>Local</strong> <strong>1994</strong>pointed out language in the CountyCharter, was forced to back away from4 The T e <strong>Local</strong> c l Link L n • Fall 20100 0
their plan to contract outthe Montgomery CountyConservation Corps—asmall program by budgetarystandards, but one thatserves a big purpose.Language in the CountyCharter requires that theCouncil conduct a studyon the economic benefitto contracting out aprogram before they canimplement such a plan.Consequently, the fourrank-and-file workerswho help provide job andlife skills to disadvantaged youth in theCounty will continue their vital work atleast until a study is completed.<strong>Local</strong> <strong>1994</strong> President Gino Rennesummed up the process this way: “Afterthey got a hard look at the Executive’sbudget proposals, several Councilmembers took the initiative to force areevaluation.“Everyone on our side had acceptedthe inevitable need for some pain, but weabsolutely insisted that it be doled out ona more equitable basis. Unfortunately, theCouncil still backed away from many ofthe tough decisions.”It was that insistence on the part ofthe union that prompted several Councilmembers to devise the progressivefurlough schedule and to includeemergency services, fire and policeofficers in the furloughs.It was the solid pressurefrom the union membersthat made the difference.The workers who showed up every timethey were called to bear witness to theprocess ultimately changed this budget.It was transformed from a document thatwould have heaved the entire burdenonto the backs of the County’s generalgovernment workers and the County’smost vulnerable and fragile residents toone that, while still heavy, is spread a bitmore equally across the board.Even though the union moved the finalbudget miles away from where it was,some residual bitterness is still lingering.The media, the County Executive andseveral Council members tried to portrayCounty workers and their union as villains.Meanwhile, the County’s Public Schoolsystem, which consumes 57 percent, morethan $2.2 billion, of the $4 billion budgetwas, for the most part, unscathed by thebudget cuts.“<strong>We</strong>’ve said all along that Countyresidents shouldn’t have to choosebetween important services—safety, oreducation; health or teachers. However,you can never convince me that theCounty’s Public School System got anyscrutiny whatsoever—with its enormousbureaucracy…only half of its 22,000employees are teachers. The systemspends some $396 million for ‘support’—and I guarantee that the bus drivers andcustodians are a minuscule part of thatnumber. <strong>We</strong> will probably never know forsure, but a lot of that $396 million goesto buy exotic and untested technology,or to pay 10 percent of the educationworkforce—bureaucrats, administratorsand bosses who don’t add much value tothe educational system,” Renne said.In fact, 2,626 of the school system’s22,000 employees make in excess of$100,000 annually. That’s 10 percent of itsworkforce.R.I.P. Not Dead;Just ReincarnatedThe Retirement IncentiveProgram that the County Executiveand <strong>Local</strong> <strong>1994</strong> had agreed upon lastyear will NOT be implemented. TheCounty Council effectively blockedthe action by refusing to issue an upor down vote on it. But a new plan istaking its place.In a Memorandum ofUnderstanding with the County,the new R.I.P. is available toemployees whose positions wereup for abolishment. If an employeesigned up for the previous retirementincentive plan, the county had togive priority status to his or herapplication for this R.I.P. To beotherwise eligible, employeeshad to be within two years ofnormal retirement and had to retireeffective June 1. There were severaloptions – a $35,000 lump sum (orpaid out over 12 months in equalinstallments) $30,000 incentivepayment, and maintain their lifeinsurance benefits as if an activeemployee for 10 years; $28,000 anda 90%-10% split on retiree healthbenefits for the first 5 years afterretirement; or the option to investthe $35,000 in the GRIP retirementplan, which has a 7.25% guaranteedreturn each year.The <strong>Local</strong> Link • Fall 2010 5
Change language