Traveling TB patient, selfish or stupid?

Okay, maybe it’s the heat, the phase of the moon… but every story I read about Andrew Speaker, trial lawyer and world traveler that was diagnosed with tuberculosis and proceeded to travel about Europe and then snuck home to the U.S. via Canada has me banging my head against my desk.

The initial stories would not identify the individual because of the “stigma” associated with TB. A person that after being informed that he had an exceptionally dangerous, contagious disease that was resistant to conventional treatments, intentionally traveled by plane (after being told not to) and via a circuitous route to avoid detection and non-fly lists. A person who actions could have started an epidemic. We don’t want to stigmatize that person?
Not only did he deserve to be identified, his name and picture should go into the history books right along side Typhoid Mary. At least at first, Mary Mallon did not know she was contagious. Don’t pull an Andrew Speaker should be added to the lexicon as an act of pure selfish behavior and shear stupidity, used to shame children into behaving.

His excuse for leaving Rome after he was informed that he was considered especially dangerous – he feared that he would not “survive” if he didn’t reach the U.S. for treatment. He was in Europe and Canada, those bastions of “Universal Heath Care” The same “model” heath care system that Hilliary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards and their ilk want for the rest of us. I suppose the only better place for him to have been would have been Cuba.

I could have probably let it go until today’s story Border Worker Disregarded TB Warning about the border inspector that permitted the infected Andrew Speaker to pass from Canada into the U.S.

The unidentified inspector explained that he was no doctor but that the infected man seemed perfectly healthy and that he thought the warning was merely “discretionary“
…
Colleen Kelley, president of the union that represents customs and border agents, declined to comment on the specifics of the case, but said “public health issues were not receiving adequate attention and training” within the agency.

Discretionary? Adequate attention and training?

Let’s see how hard this is.

Trainer: You pass the passport through this scanner here – and then you read the screen. If it says PASS, you can let the person in. If it says anything else, follow the instructions or notify a supervisor. Here, lets try this sample here…beep. Okay, what does the screen say?

WARNING – DETAIN TRAVELER.

TUBERCULOSIS

For your protection, anyone dealing with this person should take precautions and wear a protective mask.

Call heath authorities immediately.

Trainer: Okay, what do you do?

Potential Border Inspector: Uh, let him pass?

Trainer: You fired!

Not that hard. Think I’m kidding? He’s the AP account:

The inspector ran Speaker’s passport through a computer, and a warning – including instructions to hold the traveler, don a protective mask in dealing with him, and telephone health authorities – popped up, officials said. About a minute later, Speaker was instead cleared to continue on his journey, according to officials familiar with the records.

And “Inspector Fife” took this as discretionary. If it had been me, “the worker fled with great enthusiasm” would be about the politest thing that would have been written as I went for the nearest face mask and and megaphone to “deal” with Mr. Speaker from a few hundred feet or so.

Just so you feel safer, “The border agent who questioned that person is at present performing administrative duties,” said Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke, adding those duties do not include checking people at the land border crossing.” We can only hope that those duties do not include anything other than making sure that the sun continues to rise in the east and sets in the west – anything else may be considered “discretionary.”

If there can be anything good to come from this officials in the U.S. (national and local) and in Europe need to examine every aspect of this case and determine an effective measure that would have stopped Mr Speaker at each step of his journey. With threats like Avian flu, Ebola virus, small pox,… these actions need to be implemented immediately. At each step, identify a weakness, identify a plan to fix it and then implement it. These step can be taken individually and in parallel, while the inevitable blue ribbon panels hold hearings and hash out the details.

When they produce their reports we can look at their recommendations and then make adjustments. But we should not wait for the “Grand Unified Plan” that will cure all ills. It will not exist, or ever be implemented, but having multiple layers of independent checks just might give us a chance.

News you will not see from Howard County

The Examiner is reporting that Anne Arundel County Council will approve the proposed $1.2 billion budget (County to approve $1.2B budget)

A quote that you will not see in Howard County anytime soon:

The average taxpayer will see a slight drop in his tax bill despite a 2 percent rise in assessments, as the county will lower its property tax rate by 2.9 percent to meet the required cap on tax revenues.

A comparison of the two county’s budgets and populations.

And, I wonder why the Howard county budget does not contain a similar chart to this from page 34 of the Anne Arundel Budget Message (pdf)

Public Information Act

Did you ever write to request information under Maryland’s PIA laws?  It is a pain in the neck.  One gets the run around.  However, write under the Freedom of Information Act and the Feds throw tons of stuff at you.

Reporters and Newspapers are familiar with the process and is every level of Government.  That is why I don’t understand why Howard County has failed to respond to a PIA request from the Baltimore Examiner.

The failure to respond to PIA places the County at risk of being sued and/or penalized.  Mr. Ulman owes an explanation as to why the County has failed to respond (that means they could say buzz off we aren’t giving you the information or they could supply the requested information) within the required 30 days.  Don’t tell me it is not his responsibility to explain.  At the point the County failed to follow the law in this matter they left the County exposed to legal action.  As such this matter deems Mr. Ulman’s attention.

An alert reader sent this information from the Baltimore Examiner

BALTIMORE  – What a difference 30 miles can make. In Baltimore City, the police department either refuses to answer questions about overtime or will not without a Maryland Public Information Act request, which gives government 30 days to respond. In Carroll County, the police outline why and how overtime was used — and what specifically it did for taxpayers — upon request.

How refreshing.

The deputy earning the highest overtime in Carroll, Conrad Dill, earned $21,084 extra last year chasing motorists who did not stop for school buses. We still don’t know how Baltimore City Detective Albert Marcus, the highest-paid police employee in his department, earned $104,423 in overtime in 2006, bumping his salary to $167,421. Protecting and serving in Baltimore City requires different tactics and more frequent work in life threatening situations than in Carroll, but taxpayers in every jurisdiction deserve transparency.

That’s why The Baltimore Examiner requested — as any resident can — salary and overtime information for public employees in our coverage area: Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Carroll County, Howard County, Harford County, and Anne Arundel County. It’s also why we have published and will continue to make available that information in print and online as it comes.

Aside from Baltimore City and Carroll, Baltimore County and Harford County have promised to make the information available. Howard and Anne Arundel counties have not responded to the request within the 30 days allotted under the Maryland Public Information Act. They must earn the public’s trust. We all are waiting. To residents of those counties, call Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold at 410-222-1821 and Howard County Executive Ken Ulman at 410-313-2013 and tell them to release the information.

Some public employees say that salary and overtime information should be secret. We don’t think so, and the law says the data are open.

Scrutiny makes everyone more efficient and honest. Sunshine only embarrasses employees who cheat taxpayers and officials who let them do it.

Ehrlich, Elections, and Electricity Reprise

I have been thinking it and started a post on it.  Then the MD GOP sent this out.  I could not have said it any better.

O’Malley yelled at the top of his lungs on the looming 72% electric rate increases (despite the fact that Ehrlich had nothing to do with it except try to fix it then O’Malley blew that apart).  Now the O’Malley is singing from the same sheet of music as the Ehrlich Administration sang from.  Thing is O’Malley had a copy of the sheet of music before the election because he knew he would have to use it himself.

Now perhaps O’Malley is looking at the $23.7M in taxes that BGE paid to Maryland in 2006 (not to mention Constellation Energy’s state tax bill).  Since a great deal of this tax bill is based upon gross receipts (some is based on property and other items) perhaps Mr. O’Malley sees this as a hidden tax to help with the State’s revenue problems.

Maybe County Executive Ulman will push forward his energy co-op plan.  For those of you waiting for me to bash Mr. Ulman I am not being tongue in cheek -  I am serious.

 ————————————————

DESPITE PROMISES TO “STOP THE RATE HIKES,” ELECTRIC RATES ARE GOING UP BY OVER 50% ON JUNE 1^ST

THEN – Candidate O’Malley Promised Immediate Relief From Electric Rate Hikes.  “Martin O’Malley and Anthony Brown will work to provide immediate relief from the impending rate hikes for our families, small businesses and the most vulnerable in our communities.”  (O’Malley Campaign Web site, http://www.martinomalley.com/content/591, accessed May 28, 2007)

THEN - Candidate O’Malley Promised To “Stop The Rate Hikes.”  “‘The special interests already have their governor – we need one of our own,’ says a voice-over in the mayor’s commercial. ‘Martin O’Malley: taking on BGE to stop the rate hikes.’”  (David Abrams, “Politicos jockey for credit on BGE rate deal,” The Capital, 6/25/06)(emphasis added)

NOW - Governor O’Malley Announced His Hand-Picked Public Service Commission Has Approved The Largest Electric Rate Increase in Maryland History – Going Up Over 50% For The Average BGE Customer on June 1^st.  “It is with reluctance, but with little legal option, that the Commission in this Order approves the approximately 50 percent rate increase resulting from a pass-through of supply costs proposed by BGE for its electric residential customers receiving its Standard Offer Service.”  (Public Service Commission Order, 5/23/07)

Ø      SENIORS AND LOW-INCOME FAMILIES FORGOTTEN

THEN – Candidate O’Malley Promised To Protect Seniors and Low-Income Families From Any Electric Rate Increase.  “O’Malley will also work to ensure that all residents are automatically enrolled in the shock absorber plan, and not be subject to an opt-in provision that disproportionately harms seniors and low-income Marylanders.” (O’Malley Campaign Web site, http://www.martinomalley.com/content/591 , accessed May 28, 2007)

NOW – The O’Malley Administration Says There Is Nothing They Can Do To Help Seniors and Low-Income Families.  “[Public Service] Commission Chairman Steven B. Larsen said he had concerns about the effect of the increase on people with low incomes, but he said the commission had no legal basis to deny the increase as Maryland transitions to market prices after years of capped rates.”  (John Wagner and Avis Thomas-Lester, “BGE Customers to Face Heftier Energy Bills in June,” Washington Post, 5/24/07)

In Contrast, Governor Bob Ehrlich Reached Agreement For Over $600 Million In Assistance For Marylanders Hit Hardest By An Electric Rate Increase, But A Lawsuit From O’Malley Killed The Deal.  “ Due to Baltimore City’s interference, more than one million Marylanders were saddled last week with an electric rate stabilization plan that includes far less assistance than the plan negotiated with Baltimore Gas & Electric and Constellation Energy in April and includes no concessions whatsoever from energy companies for working families. This unfortunate development resulted from the Baltimore City Administration’s lawsuit against the Public Service Commission, which had previously approved a plan that offered customers far more assistance…I introduced a plan that reflected our basic agreement and included $600 million in cash relief from Constellation Energy for working families to help offset the large rate increase resulting from the flawed 1999 deregulation law. The City’s lawsuit effectively voided these benefits and stuck working families with a plan that benefits energy companies more than customers.” (Governor Robert Ehrlich, Letter to Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller and House Speaker Michael E. Busch, 6/5/06)Ø      CONSUMER ADVOCATES NOT APPOINTED TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

THEN – Candidate O’Malley Promised to Replace the Public Service Commission With Advocates For Consumers.  “Replace PSC Members: Install Advocate for Consumers in Negotiations. O’Malley will support measures that will immediately get new, independent, competent regulators on the job – replacing the existing industry-dominated PSC.”  (O’Malley Campaign Web site, http://www.martinomalley.com/content/591, accessed May 28, 2007)

• Candidate O’Malley Accused PSC Of Not Doing Enough To Shield Consumers From Rate Increases.  “Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley, a Democratic candidate for governor, yesterday called for commission Chairman Kenneth D. Schisler to resign, saying he and other Ehrlich appointees aren’t doing enough to shield consumers from the rate increases.” (Andrew Green, “Former industry leaders regulating state utilities,” Baltimore Sun, 3/14/06)

NOW - Governor O’Malley Appointed Public Service Commissioners With No History of Consumer Activism.  “(Governor O’Malley) named two commissioners (to fill vacant slots) who lack a history of zealous consumer activism.”  (Barry Rascovar, “O’Malley’s reality check: Power has limits,” The Gazette, 2/23/07)

• New Chairman Has No Background in Utility Regulation.  “O’Malley’s choice for PSC chairman, Steve Larsen, has no background in utility regulation, which mocks the governor’s pledge to select commissioners with expertise in this arcane and complex field.”  (Barry Rascovar, “O’Malley’s reality check: Power has limits,” The Gazette, 2/23/07)
• Former Commissioner Who Approved The Failed 1999 Deregulation Plan Added To PSC.  “(Governor O’Malley’s) other ‘new’ commissioner, Suzanne Brogan, is actually a retread and was one of the members who approved electric rate deregulation in 1999 — a move O’Malley and other Democrats loudly denounced as anti-consumer.”  (Barry Rascovar, “O’Malley’s reality check: Power has limits,” The Gazette, 2/23/07)
• Constellation Energy Executive Re-Appointed To PSC.  “To top off his PSC moves, (Governor O’Malley) reappointed Harold Williams to another five-year term, even though he worked nearly 20 years for the Evil Empire of state utilities, Constellation Energy.”  (Barry Rascovar, “O’Malley’s reality check: Power has limits,” The Gazette, 2/23/07)

Ø      O’MALLEY HAS FAILED TO ACT

THEN – Candidate O’Malley Criticized Then-Governor Ehrlich For Allegedly Failing to Act.  “O’Malley said the governor and the PSC members he appointed failed to act and hold hearings as they should have to hold down BGE rates. ‘The governor should have stepped up and done something,’ O’Malley said.”  (Len Lazarick, “Ehrlich, O’Malley debate electric rates, PSC,” The Examiner Washington, Sept. 15, 2006)

NOW - Governor O’Malley Has Failed To Act.  “ During last year’s campaign, O’Malley accused the commission, which then had a majority of Ehrlich appointees, of ‘rubber-stamping’ BGE’s rate request. Yesterday, the tables were turned.  ‘O’Malley’s pledge to hold the line on rate increases and help working families was a false campaign promise,’ state GOP Chairman James Pelura said in a statement.  ‘His lack of visibility on this issue shows he will do and say whatever it takes to get elected.’”  (John Wagner and Avis Thomas-Lester, “BGE Customers to Face Heftier Energy Bills in June,” Washington Post, 5/24/07)

NOW - On June 1^st, Electric Rates Will Go Up By 50% For BGE Customers.  “State officials reluctantly approved a 50 percent rate increase yesterday for the 1.1 million residential customers of Baltimore Gas and Electric Co., saying they had “little legal option” to defer or reduce the utility company’s proposal.  The increase goes into effect June 1.”  (Brian Witte, “Officials Approve BGE’s Increase,” Washington Times, 5/24/07)(emphasis added)

Growth of the Howard County Government.

The Howard County council recently passed the $1,325,331,673 operating budget proposed by Ken Ulman virtually unchanged. This budget expands the budget by 10.7% and adds 517 new positions. Since 2004 (the first year I could find budget numbers) the Howard County budget has increased by more than 37%. According to the Maryland State Archives, the population for Howard County is projected to increase by just 15.7% from 247842 in 2000 to 294,000 in 2010.

What is the goal of recycling?

What is the goal of recycling? Seems like a simple question, but like most things when you start to look into the details it may not be so cut and dried.

Susan Kinsella at the August 30, 2004 National Recycling Coalition Conference asks the following:

Of course, this raises the question of when should we count something as “recycled”?
Is it when it’s “diverted,” even if eventually it’s landfilled?
Is it when it reaches a manufacturer, even if it cannot be used by them?
Or is it when it actually gets used to make a product?

Both the Baltimore Sun (Recycling redux) and the Examiner (“Single-stream” recycling encourages more to take part) recently published articles on Howard County recycling.

Howard County Executive Ken Ulman (D) is going to spend $280,000 on 5,000 wheeled bins that will be distributed in a pilot program in Elkridge. And if the program “works” it will be expanded to the entire county at a cost of 4 million dollars.

From the Sun:

If Howard’s planned pilot program is successful, it could show how to boost collections at a time when recycling growth has slowed nationwide.

Though the amount of trash that is recycled nationally grew from 16 percent in 1990 to 29 percent in 2000, it has risen to just 32 percent since then, according to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The Environmental Protection Agency’s goal is 38 percent by next year.

According to the Maryland Recyclers Collation Howard County’s waste diversion rate was 45%.

During 2006, Howard’s recycling system took in 58,092 tons, with 24,150 of that from curbside collections, Tomlin said. The rest – things like branches, construction debris, tires, wood, electronics and yard waste – were brought by residents to the county’s Alpha Ridge Landfill. The amount collected last year represented roughly a 6 percent increase over 2005. Commercial firms, which collect trash from businesses and apartments, recycled 121,168 tons in the county, said Alan Wilcom, chief of the county’s recycling division.

Mr. Ulman is proposing to spend 4 million dollars on what amounts to 13.5% of Howard County’s recycled waste. Sure, it may be the most visible part of the program and everyone can “feel good” about recycling, but how effective is it?

One metric that can be used to measure the effectiveness of a recycling program is measuring the volume (or weight) or curb side collection will increase. The theory being that if people have larger bins with wheels, then they will recycle more. In conjunction with this is the concept of “single stream” where all recyclable materials can be mixed and collected at the same time and then separated at a special facility. A complication of the single stream collection is that it can reduce the usability of the materials. The Recycle America facility that processes Howard County’s recycled materials opened in August 2006 in Elkridge and sounds like a model facility. However, neither the Sun or the Examiner articles provide specifics about the efficiency of the plant.

A 2004 study quoted by Susan Kinsella:

In fact, AF&PA released a study in March that found that the cost for manufacturing products
increased by $8/ton when using materials from single stream processors. Even though single stream
tended to reduce the cost of curbside collection by $15/ton, it increased the overall cost of recycling
by $3/ton.

And from her conclusion:

I don’t hear people evaluating choices based on the health of the whole recycling system, only on
what each choice will do for them. But recycling is a collaborative system. All the different sectors in
recycling have to cooperate with each other in order to further their own long-term self-interest.

…

We need to expand our concept of “diversion” to embrace focus on quality and environmental benefits. Why do recyclers put so much focus on collecting materials and so little on what’s needed to manufacture recycled products that customers will be happy to buy? Putting the focus on what’s needed to manufacture these products is what will reliably drive the diversion from landfills that we want.

What is the goal of the Howard County recycling program? Is it enough to initially divert waste that we would send to a landfill no matter where it eventually ends up? If diverted resources end up being landfilled by a manufacturer or consume more resources to process, are we really helping the environment, or are we just making our selves feel good?

Is this the most economical and environmentally friendly way to spend our 4 million dollars? How about expanding the hours / days that the Alpha Ridge facility is open for recycling? Currently, Alpha Ridge collects 58% of our residential recycled materials, would having the facility open a few days of the week in the evenings increase participation and reduce the lines that form every Saturday? Just think of the gas savings alone.

We should not just settle for diverted. We should be able to measure and then strive to maximize all portions of the recycling chain while minimizing the cost to tax-payers. Before spending more of our money, the administration should be able to document that this is indeed the best use of these funds.

Let’s import cheap gas from Mexico.

The Los Angeles Times reports that Americans are taking advantage of $2.60 per gallon gasoline in Mexico. Gasoline prices in CA are averaging $3.43 and top $4.00 in some places. California resident Roger Moore a 63-year-old management consultant (and obvious government policy and oil industry expert.)

“It costs $65 for a tank of gas up there and it costs me $45 here,” Moore said. “It’s a monopoly and it’s cheaper!”

Before House Speaker Pelosi dusts off her 4/24/2006 speech ‘With Skyrocketing Gas Prices, Americans Can No Longer Afford Rubber Stamp Congress’ and starts advocating we buy cheep gas from Mexico, she may want to read more of the article and take a basic Macro-Economics class:

Turns out that the fuel is not a “clean” as the fuel mandated in California (and because of the Maryland General assembly, coming to a pump near you.) And wait, there is more:

The [Mexican] government regulates every aspect of the industry, including the retail price that consumers pay at the pump. There are two sets of prices: one for stations in select cities along the northern border and another for the rest of the country. Officials tend to peg border prices to those in the U.S. so that Mexican operators can stay competitive with their American counterparts.

But as U.S. gas prices have soared, Mexico’s border prices for regular have remained at 7.41 pesos a liter, or about $2.60 a gallon, for most of the year. Prices in the interior are even lower at 6.88 pesos a liter, or about $2.41 a gallon.

Rising demand is straining Mexico’s refining capacity. In April, the world’s No. 5 oil producer had to import almost 45% of its gasoline, Pemex statistics show. Most of that came from the U.S. But the Mexican government hasn’t boosted retail prices significantly to reflect tight supplies.

So, unless U.S. and other refineries are selling at below market prices to Mexico, the Mexican government is subsidizing U.S. drivers. I wonder if Mr. “Monopolies Are Good” Moore took these other items into consideration:

• $0.447 – CA Gas Tax (Other taxes include a 6% state sales tax and 1.25% county, plus additional local sales taxes and 1.2 cpg state UST fee.)
• $0.184 – Federal Gas Tax
• ? – Cost of meeting CA fuel mixture requirements.
• ? – Cost of doing business in Mexico v.s. CA (for the retailer)

So, if we deduct the $0.631 cpg CA and Federal taxes, the $0.28 (est.) cpg for local and other taxes, the average retail price in California would be $2.58 per gallon – two cents cheaper than in Mexico.

No word if Ms. Pelosi is planning to stop the obscene profits of Big Government and their cronies, the Democratic Party.   Just a though as you empty your wallet this Memorial Day weekend.

BIG BROTHER RUN AMOK – AGAIN

So I was watching TV this evening and sy the glorious press coverage of the Howard County smoking ban, and it dawned on me that what I was watching was historic.  Not in  the sense of something that should be remembered, but in the sense of how out of control BIG BROTHER has gotten in the last few years with no signs of improving. 

 The owner of the Mi Casa restaurant spoke and indicated that he had already banned smoking in his restaurant, before the County law took effect.  No issue with him taking that action.  If he felt that was the right thing for his business and his clientele, then he has every right to do so.

 However, my issue with the “ban smoking everywhere band wagon” is that there are already many other establishments that have VOLUNTARILY banned smoking in their buildings.  That being the case, why is there a need for total abloishment?  It seems that the pro-smoker to anti-smoker status is about 40-60.  If all of the anti-smoker owned establishments banned smoking, and the pro-smoker establishments allowed smoking, wouldn’t that be a fair result?  Doesn’t that leave the choice to the business owner, as should be the case in a free-market society?  I understand the health concerns – employees who don’t to work in an establishment wouldn’t have to.  They’d have a choice.  Smokers wouldn’t be left out in the cold (literally), they’d have a choice.   SIDE NOTE:  the cardiologist who performed my heart scan informed me that the are minimal health concerns for someone who smokes less that 1 pack a day.  He said that amount is essentially no more risky than breathing the air outside because the body can process and counter the effects.  It’s only when people smoke more than their body can handle, that serious health impacts come into play.  I don’t know exactly how much second hand smoke equates to 1 pack a day, but it would be interesting to know.  Anyway – the employee choice factor over-rides the second hand smoke argument.

 The other oddity with the smoking/anti-smoking push and pull is that if it really came down to a pure health issue, then what other aspects of our lives and businesses will be intruded on next?  There are already several cities that are pushing to ban trans fats.  What’s next?  Ban all fast food establishments?  Mandate serving raw vegetables at movie theaters instead of popcorn?  Outlaw Halloween, Valentine’s Day, and Easter since those are candy infested events?  Why not abolish alcohol (oops – tried that already)?    

I realize that the people who support the smoking ban think they are doing the right thing.  But taking away freedoms and choices given to the people by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is not the right thing to do.  It’s a slippery slope that should be avoided. 

DPZ Ombudsman

I have read several articles now about the new Ombudsman for the Howard County Department of Planning and Zoning (reference the article titled “New Planning Official aims to reach, engage public” in the 5/3/07 edition of the HCTimes, and the Opinion page in the same edition).

 Although the concept of having an “outreach” person is admirable, and Kimberley Flowers has excellent qualifications for the position, there is a larger underlying problem that needs to be dealt with in order for this initiative to be successful.  That underlying problem is a persistent habit of the County Executive (present and former administration) and Councilpersons (present and former) interfering or meddling in the day to day business of the Department of Planning and Zoning (the Comp Lite fiasco certainly stands out as the most egregious example). 

 Now, you may ask, what exactly do I mean.  What I mean is this.  The Department of Planning and Zoning has taken a lot of misplaced blame for how the public perceives the planning process, whether it’s subdivision regulations, site plan review, variance applications, comprehensive planning and General Plan updates, and so on.  The bottom line is that the staff of DPZ have always held a firm and fair line in the application of the regulations to the various plans and applications that are submitted to that Department.  It is only when “the politicians” get involved, that the system breaks down.  Even the Director of DPZ is subject to pressures from the County Executive or Councilpersons, and is sometimes forced to take action contrary to how he/she would/should.  True, the Director serves at the pleasure of the CE, and is subject to confirmation by the Council.  However, that does not mean that the CE or Councilpersons should interfere in the process to serve their own agenda, or that of a campaign contributor, or a weatlhy land owner.  The rules are supposed to be applied equally to ALL persons in the County.  Rule #1 of the government is that it shall not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner.  It rarely turns out that way, as I can attest from my years in that Department.  It’s a source of tremendous resentment when the staff would be forced to approve something, such as a waiver petition, contrary to past precedent, simply because the applicant was a person with connections.  When neighbors or community activists would call to discuss how approval could be granted, the staff, including myself on many occasions, would have no explanation other than “we were over-ruled”.  It’s no wonder the public doesn’t trust DPZ, but it’s not DPZ’s fault.  The blame lies with any CE or Councilperson who abuses and violates the established laws and procedures for their own agendas. 

 If Ms. Flowers can overcome and help to end the history of politicization and manipulation of the zoning system that comes from outside (or above) DPZ, including from the person who appointed her, then, and only then, will the system be better understood and trusted.  And, she will definitely have earned her pay.  I wish her luck – she has a rough road ahead of her.  

Constant Yield Tax Rate – Public Meeting

How many people understand that Howard County exceeds the State’s Contstant Yield Tax Rate  (CYTR)?

The CYTR is a State law that prohibits local government from setting the property tax rate at a level that will generate revenues that exceed the previous years property tax revenues.

From the State Department of Assesments and Taxation

The Constant Yield concept is that, as assessments rise, the tax rate should drop to the point that the revenue derived from the property tax stays at a constant level from one year to the next, thus assuring a “constant yield” from this tax source. The Constant Yield Tax Rate is simply a property tax rate that, when applied to new assessments, will result in the taxing authority receiving the same revenue in the coming taxable year that was produced in the prior taxable year.

That does not happen in Howard County. Howard County doesn’t have to follow the provisions of the CYTR and has not for quite some time.  The County Executive and the County Council can raise the property tax rate above the CYTR if they choose.

Here are the rates mailed to the County Governments in February.

http://www.dat.state.md.us/sdatweb/stats/cytr.htm

What this basically tells you is that Howard County will take in $20.7M more in additional revenues based on the increase in assessed values of our personal property.  If they wanted to keep it neutral they could – they choose not to.

This is an escallating revenue stream to the county and an escallating tax increase to the tax payer.  Why?  Because the tax increase to the tax payer is capped to 5% every year and will continue to rise until the fully assessed tax in phased in (in the mean time our properties will be re-assessed which will likely result in even higher taxes).  So, the County has a built in tax increase.  This tax increase represents 25% of the proposed operating budget increases of $78.4M.  The rest of the budget funding increases come from improved income tax revenues and other sources.  In other words.  If the County set the property tax rate at the CYTR the County would still be able to fund an 8% budget increase.

This brings into question the need for the 30% tax increase in 2003 and the increase in the fire tax.  Mr. Ulman is proposing a whopping budget increase based on projected revenues and a looming property tax increase in the context of the CYTR.  They have a built in tax increase in terms of assessments on property taxes, and they constanty raise the property tax rate above the CYTR every year.  This is not government living within it’s means.

Again from the SDAT:

Although setting of the local property tax rates is the task of elected officials, Maryland’s Constant Yield Tax Rate Provision gives property owners a voice in the process before the final tax rates are determined. This is done by requiring each taxing jurisdiction to give advance notice and hold public meetings prior to the rate setting if they are considering a tax rate higher than the Constant Yield Tax Rate. Most meetings are held during April, May and early June. Tax rates must be set by July 1, which is the beginning of the tax year.

Can anyone on this list tell me if they ever attended such a public meeting?

If not you have your chance tonight at 7PM at the George Howard Building.