On The Spot

This blog has moved

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:53:00 +0000

This blog is now located at http://blog.spotsygop.com/.
You will be automatically redirected in 30 seconds, or you may click here.

For feed subscribers, please update your feed subscriptions to
http://blog.spotsygop.com/feeds/posts/default.

Spotsy GOP Chairman Thomas Responds to Tonight's County BOS Tax Hike

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:15:00 +0000

County GOP Chairman Steve Thomas made the following statement tonight after the vote to increase property taxes was passed.

"Of course, we are very disappointed at tonight's result. We had hoped that the Board majority would have listened to the taxpayers and businesses who did not want a tax hike above equalization.

This vote is more than unwise politically- it is simply bad policy. This Board of Supervisors has now raised property taxes over 15% just since the Great Recession began- which explains why Spotsylvania led all of Virginia in foreclosure rate last year. One can only hope a similar effect on businesses does not come to pass. This is what bad policy does- hurt the taxpayers and the county.

We were pleased to see our own nominee, Mr. Logan, and endorsee, Mr. Jackson, vote with the taxpayers. We do hope this makes it crystal clear to the taxpayers in the county that we do stand with them for limited government and a low-tax, pro-growth philosophy. They, and we, have a long way to go- but together, we can get there. If they are willing to help, we'll be at the Salem church Library April 29 at 7pm."

Hundreds of Spotsy Conservatives Tell Supervisors to "Hold The Line!" On Proposed Tax Rate

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:35:00 +0000

from today's Free Lance-Star

Even though they face as much as a 42 percent increase in their real-estate tax bills, Spotsylvania County business owners were largely absent from last night's public hearing on the fiscal year 2011 budget.

But some residents showed up to urge supervisors to keep taxes low.

Business owners will pay more in real-estate taxes because the 2010 assessments for commercial property increased three-tenths of a percent. With an equalized tax rate of 83 cents per $100 assessed value, a commercial property owner would pay $1,062 more for a building assessed at $500,000.

An equalized tax rate means the county will generate the same amount of revenue as it did this fiscal year.

If the rate approved is 88 cents, which is what supervisors advertised, businesses will pay 42 percent more.

Residential property assessments declined overall by 28.2 percent, and more than half of county residents will pay less or the same in real-estate taxes with an equalized rate. How much more those who did have increases in their residential assessments will pay depends on the rate supervisors approve later this month.

One man said his real-estate tax bill could increase at least $900 a year.

...[READ MORE]

Specifics from our Chairman about our Reagan Day Dinner This Coming Monday, April 12

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 14:33:00 +0000

Dear Fellow Spotsy Republicans,

As you know by now, the Spotsylvania Republican Committee, along with the Louisa GOP, is having our annual celebration of the Gipper and Honest Abe on this Monday, April 12, at 7 pm (with a 6 pm VIP reception) at the Lake Anna Winery.

This is a HUGE event for our committee and for helping Rob Wittman and Eric Cantor get re-elected- AND for helping do our part to take back Congress from the grip of Nancy Pelosi! The more we raise to help Rob and Eric, the more they can help Republican challengers beat four- yes, four- Democratic incumbents in Virginia! These are 1/10 the number of pickups needed to take back the House!

The tickets are an affordable $60 for individuals, $500 for a small table of 6, and $800 for a table of 10. Why get the tables instead of individual tickets? Because then you get invited to a special VIP reception with the special guest of the evening, Congressman Rob Wittman!

In addition to Congressman Wittman, an all-star lineup of Chris Peace, Bobby Orrock, Mark Cole, and many other local standouts in the General Assembly will be there, as well as Republican Party of Virginia Chairman Pat Mullins.

Committee member Cheryl Snyder, who has catered for the White House, will cater this event, which will include some of the best wine in Virginia! It will be an event that is truly worth your time and treasure!
So I hope you will join these guests and myself for a wonderful evening, where we get to celebrate a little- and prepare ourselves for the battle ahead in November!
Steve Thomas,
Chairman
Spotsylvania Republican Committee

You're Invited! Spotsy-Louisa Reagan Day Dinner: Monday April 12 Details and Menu

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 14:23:00 +0000

Be our Guest!

Monday April 12, 2010- for the 2nd Annual Reagan Day Dinner & GOP Fundraiser at 7:00pm [link to invitation here] at Lake Anna Winery. It's hosted jointly by the Spotsylvania Republican and Louisa Republican Committees.

Several very special guests will be in attendance that you won't want to miss. Also- a special singing performance by a nationally-known celebrity, plus rare and prestigious prizes will be given away too!

Come support your hard working local committees and enjoy a great dinner and fellowship with Americans who share your concerns about the direction our country is headed.

We are indeed fortunate to have as our caterer Cheryl Snyder. She has catered for the White House.

She has prepared an excellent menu for our enjoyment on Monday. Please get your reservations/RSVP's in immediately because we have to give Cheryl a final count. Folks who know guarantee the dinner will be worth the price.

Menu:

Hors d’oeuvres

Carved Steamship Round of Beef served with horseradish, mayonnaise, mustard, and au jus with petit rolls

Chicken Marsala with rice

Seasoned mashed potatoes topped with shredded cheese and parsley

Green beans almandine, sweet corn and carrots

Mixed green salad with assorted dressings

Rolls and butter

French Vanilla cake with Chocolate Amaretto icing garnished with whip cream and fruit

Coffee and Tea

Wine Glass and wine provided by hosts Bill and Ann Heidig

White chocolate mint squares, with Republican logo (naturally) provided by Catering with Class, LLC

Have questions? Interested in sponsorship opportunities? Need tickets? Call Spotsylvania GOP Chairman Steve Thomas: 703-819-0127

Recommended Savings to Spotsylvania Budget v2

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 20:43:00 +0000

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SPOTSYLVANIA BUDGET SAVINGS (SECOND DRAFT)
[click HERE] for a copy in Word.
INTRODUCTION

In February, Spotsylvania County Administrator Doug Barnes presented his recommendations for the Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) budget to the Board of Supervisors with a property tax rate of 86 cents per $100 valuation, which would be an increase of three centers over the equalization rate of 83 cents. The Board of Supervisor advertised a rate of 88 cents per $100, five cents above equalization. However, some Supervisors have expressed hope for the equalized rate. That is why we first presented our budget recommendations last month. Since then, certain factors have led us to revise them into a second draft.

First, Administrator Barnes, Treasurer Larry Pritchett, and Commissioner of the Revenue Debbie Williams were kind enough to offer their responses to the initial draft. We are very grateful for their input, and have concluded that this is a dialogue that should be continued. We want to make clear why we decided to continue the dialogue in this manner (in public). It should not be read as any intention to slight Mr. Barnes, Mr. Pritchett, Ms. Williams, or the rest of the staff. It was, in fact, the value of their comments that led us to believe the people of Spotsylvania would be best served by having this dialogue be as public and informative as possible. We also sincerely hope that the dialogue will continue.

Secondly, there was Richmond to consider. In February, Mr. Barnes based his budget in part on the assumption that the state would fund the constitutional offices in a similar manner to past budgets. That funding was reduced, adding $1.059 million in savings that needed to be found (See Appendix 3).

Thirdly, it is clear that there is little if any support for moving below the 83 cent rate. Therefore, we decided to change the metrics of our recommendations to measure how much of the required savings each option achieves. This brings the report closer to the initial spirit in which we intended to present it, as a group of alternatives from which the Supervisors could pick and choose to avoid a tax increase.

Finally, Mr. Barnes himself – at the request of Supervisor Jerry Logan – just recently revealed his own recommendations for budget changes under an 83 cent scenario. We were pleased to discover that over half of the $3.6 million in FY11 savings that Mr. Barnes detailed were in our original report. As such, not only has the dialogue been advanced, but the area and size of any disagreement has narrowed considerably. We felt that should be acknowledged, and that a second draft was required for that.

We hope this revised report can help the Board of Supervisors maintain vital services to the county as much as possible without imposing a tax increase on property owners. This is but our latest attempt. We are neither inflexible nor arrogant enough to assume no further revision is possible, and we look forward to further dialogue with the Supervisors and county staff as we work, from our various vantage points, to keep Spotsylvania a dynamic and affordable county in which to live, work, and raise a family.

Sincerely,

Steven Thomas D.J. McGuire

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Administrator Barnes recommended a budget of just under $375 million for the county for FY11. The Administrator’s Recommendations (hereafter the “Barnes 86-Cent budget”) is overall lower than last year’s budget, but when the capital and education budgets are removed, the local operating budget actually increases over last year’s. While there are certain factors beyond control that led in part to that increase, we believe these factors should be addressed by finding reductions and efficiencies elsewhere, where practicable. It was in this spirit that we produced our first set of recommendations.

Since then, the county staff has both replied directly to our report and presented its own version of an 83 cent scenario (hereafter the “Barnes 83-Cent budget,” which can be found in Appendix 2). We felt that both of these new factors required revisions to our first iteration.

In the case of an equalized tax rate, the amount of savings required is driven by two factors: the revenue generated by each cent, and the $1.059 million in funds required by the aforementioned constitutional office funding shortfall. The Barnes 86-Cent Budget has calculated that each cent per $100 valuation in the property tax yields $1.182M in FY11 revenue. There is also an effect on FY10 (which we calculate to be $591K for each cent). Thus, for each cent below 86 cents, $1.773M in savings must be found. Given that we are looking to reduce the rate by three cents, the savings required equals 3 * $1.773M + $1.059 = $6.378M.

In our initial report, we cited the roughly $1.787 million in excess strategic reserves under the Barnes 86-Cent Budget as a possible partial offset. Unfortunately, the impression may have been left that this is an optional offset. In fact, an 83 cent rate would remove $1.773M from the FY10 revenues, and thus would reduce the reserves by nearly the entire $1.787M total. In other words, the FY10 part of the savings would be automatically “covered” by the lost revenue from the equalized rate.

The good news is that the FY10 savings required is no longer a concern. The bad news is that the excess in strategic reserves is effectively zero, meaning no help from it can come for FY11. Thus, our target for FY11 savings becomes 3 * $1.182M + $1.059 = $4.605M.

In that vein, we offered several potential efficiencies or reallocations that would prevent an increase in property taxes this year. The Barnes 83-Cent Budget included several of these recommendations, accounting for 40% of the $4.605M that would be needed. Furthermore, the responses of Mr. Barnes and the rest of the county staff to our earlier recommendations led us to revise some of them. The new list is on the following page, including how far each would go toward achieving the necessary spending reduction. The options from the first edition which are also in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget are in bold. Two options were partially included in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget; they are in italics.

Recommendation

Savings Percentage of $4.605M required

Partial shift of responsibility for retirement funding to employees $1,300,000 28%

Efficiencies in Social Services Department* $1,150,028 25%

Cancellation of General Fund Transfer to Transportation Fund $877,806 19%

Net Cancellation of General Fund Transfer to Code Compliance $796,396 17%

Reduction in Regional Library Funding $597,799 13%

Suspension of increase in the Capital Reserve $536,975 12%

Reduction in Regional Agency Funding by 25% $393,290 9%

Efficiencies in Planning Department $379,302 8%

Efficiencies in Information Services Department** $350,613 8%

Efficiencies in County Assessment Office $211,107 5%

Efficiencies in Human Resources Department $136,003 3%

* Partially listed in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget: Deletion of new Social Services positions: savings of $218,000 (see Option 2)

** Partially listed in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget under Hold Half-Year Positions Vacant Full-year. Because of the lack of detail on the position in question (Operations Manager), it could not be determined how much of the $428,547 was covered in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget (see Option 7)

The above efficiencies and reallocations provide a total of $6,729,319, or 146% of the required $4.605 million. Given that the total number is well over the amount needed for equalization, the Board can select from among these recommendations – or choose all of them with reduced impacts – to produce a budget that does not have local government demand more from the citizens and landowners of Spotsylvania than last year. As noted earlier, some of the options above were included in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget. The total measurable reduction in this category is as follows:

$877,806 + $597,799 + $218,000+ $136,003 = $1,829,608

This is 40% of the $4.605 million required.

Moreover, we are more than happy to accept two of the options listed in the Barnes 83-Cent budget that were not included in our first report: namely, holding all non-Public Safety ½-year positions vacant and reducing regional agency funding by 10% (in fact, as can be seen above, we are recommending a 25% regional funding reduction in this edition). These savings total $431,053.

As such, the Barnes 83-Cent Budget includes $2,260,661 in savings with which we agree. This reduces the delta between this report and the Barnes 83-Cent Budget to just under $2.345M. With this in mind, the following page lists the options that remained outside the Barnes 83-Cent Budget, including how far each would go toward achieving the necessary spending reductions of nearly $2.345 million.

Recommendation Savings Percentage of $2.345M Delta

Partial shift of responsibility for retirement funding to employees $1,300,000 55%

Additional Efficiencies in Social Services Department $932,028 40%

Net Cancellation of General Fund Payment to Code Compliance $796,396 34%

Suspension of increase in the Capital Reserve $536,975 23%

Efficiencies in Planning Department $379,302 16%

Additional 15% Reduction in Regional Agency Funding $253,974 10%

Efficiencies in Information Services Department* N/A N/A

Efficiencies in County Assessment Office $211,107 9%

* Partially listed in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget under Hold Half-Year Positions Vacant Full-year. Because of the lack of detail on the position in question (Operations Manager), it could not be determined how much of the $428,547 was covered in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget (see Option 7)

Even excluding Information Services, the above options total $4,391,782, or 187% of the required $2.345 million (rounding up). Once again, this gives the Board the option of selecting from among these recommendations, or choosing all of them with reduced impacts, to reach the 83 cent rate.

Some of these recommendations would lead to staff reductions. The details can be found in Options 1 through 11.

It should also be noted what these recommendations do not include:

• No reduction in public safety funding (police, fire and rescue), except for the retirement contribution shift

• No reduction in local school funding

Due to this, among the many options listed in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget that were not discussed here, there are two to which we would immediately object – holding vacant five Fire and Rescue positions and reducing funding to the school system. We think the former is unwise given the current imbalance between resources and need in the eastern part of the county (which will remain until a new station in Lee Hill is built). The latter we find objectionable due to the large amount of reductions the school system has already taken due to lower funding levels from Richmond. Of course, we also do not believe the reduction in constitutional office funding should be left unaddressed, which is why we added $1.059 million to the required savings figure.

Hopefully, this revised report will be received in the way it is intended: as an opportunity for alternatives to an economically damaging tax increase just as we are trying to come out of the Great Recession. We very much appreciated the response we received from both Supervisors and staff, and we look forward to continuing the conversation with both of them.

OPTION 1: PARTIAL SHIFT OF RETIREMENT FUNDING TO EMPLOYEES

This year, the Virginia allowed local school districts to require their employees contribute to their own retirement, rather than forcing the districts to fund both sides of the usual employer-employee match as is the present situation. Dr. Hill himself has stated that this change could save the Spotsylvania School Division at least $5 million – or roughly 2.6% of the total personnel budget of $194.4 million.

The initial report included this option in the appendix because it was unsure at that time that it would become law. However, Administrator Barnes noted in his response that, in fact, county staff has always had the option to stop funding the employee part of the match and return instead to the traditional match format. The personnel budget for local government is listed as just over $50 million. Using the 2.6% figure as a guide, this change could save the General Fund at least $1.3 million annually.

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 28.2% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate; it would also cover 55.5% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget. No staff reductions are required as a result of this option.

OPTION 2: SOCIAL SERVICES EFFICIENCIES

The Department of Social Services provides numerous services across a variety of areas. Under the Barnes budget, a tax-supported increase of nearly 17% is projected in order to fill vacant positions and address “a 72% increase in benefits applications.”

As Mr. Barnes noted in his response to our first iteration of this report, that increase came over a three year period (from FY07 through FY09), half of which was before the Great Recession (which may soon be ending, as Mr. Barnes himself notes ). While Mr. Barnes made clear that most of the increase came as the Great Recession was most felt (from December 2008 through December 2009, the latter of which is halfway through FY10), roughly a third of the increase was not, which could mean the benefit application increase was driven in part by the increase in population which occurred in the early part of the last decade (and which has been slowed to a crawl in recent years).

In any event, when looking at the Social Services spending during much of the past decade (FY02-FY10), one finds that spending was actually lower than initially projected at budget adoption for every single year but two (FY03 and FY08). This leads us to believe it would be better to project spending as a function of revenue. Initially, we just used FY10 as a guide, meaning the ratio would be 1.54 to 1. After some consideration, we thought it best to go further back. Thanks to the budget data available, we were able to examine actual Social Service revenue and spending as far back as FY01. As a result of the additional data, a more robust spending to revenue relationship of 1.57 to 1 can be used:

Said ratio leads to the following:

Recommended Savings = Barnes Budget FY11 Expenditures – (FY11 Revenue * 1.57) = $17,507,247 – ($10,433,737 * 1.57) = $1,150,028

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 25.0% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate. Given that this is a specific cost estimating relationship driven by revenue, we do not expect the reduction in spending to lead to a revenue loss (a concern raised by Mr. Barnes in his response to the first iteration).

The Barnes 83-Cent Budget partially includes savings from this option under “Delete HR Director and new DSS positions.” The DSS piece of this line item is $218,000 (the HR piece is addressed in Option 11). Thus, the difference between the Barnes 83-Cent Budget and this report comes to $932,028, which would cover 39.8% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget.

This option would result in an approximate proportional reduction of 5 positions (in the absence of specific salary data, exact FTE figures could not be determined); at least two of which are currently unfilled and would be deleted under the Barnes 83-Cent Budget. Therefore, reduction is staff would be limited to three at most.

OPTION 3: CANCELLATION OF THE GENERAL FUND PAYMENT TO TRANSPORTATION

The Transportation Fund has a number of circumstances befall it in FY11, including a dramatic increase in Reserves – over $1.1 million from FY10 and a whopping $3.8 million increase from FY09. Of course, most of those reserves are slated for particular transportation districts, but the heavy increase does mean there can and should be less reliance on the General Fund. Indeed, a dramatic decrease in the General Fund transfer to Transportation would already occur under the Barnes budget (over $2 million). The Board might explore removing the remainder, which would be $877,806.

It should be noted that part of the reason for the General Fund transfer is the fact that decal revenue falls into the General Fund, rather than the Transportation Fund. We expect this concern drove Mr. Barnes’ initial concern for cancelling the transfer. It is a concern we share for the long term. As we do not expect the Great Recession to be the usual state for the economy, the Board may want to consider permanently placing the decal revenue in the Transportation Fund for FY12 and beyond, thus ensuring a steadier funding stream for Transportation.

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 19.1% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate. This option was included in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget. No staff reductions are required as a result of this option.

OPTION 4: NET CANCELLATION OF THE GENERAL FUND PAYMENT TO CODE COMPLIANCE

Prior to FY09, costs for the Code Compliance Department were covered by fees, not taxes. In fact, going back to FY01, Code Compliance usually made fees well over and above its expenses, although that was certainly due in part to the building boom here that stretched into the early 21st Century. Even as late as FY07, Code Compliance managed to get at least 96% of its budget in fees (there was a fall-off to 77% in FY08, but it returned to 96% in FY09).

FY10 saw a dramatic falloff in fees, but the Great Recession was only part of the reason. That fiscal year also saw the attempted “stimulus” fee reduction, which did nothing to alleviate the Great Recession but did manage to lose the county over $250,000 in revenue. As a result, Code Compliance is now relying on transfers from the General Fund to maintain staff. We do not consider that in the best long-term interests of the county. While Mr. Barnes has made his case otherwise, both in the Barnes 86-Cent Budget and in his response to the first edition, we simply have a disagreement here.

The Barnes 86-Cent Budget includes a General Fund payment of $1,274,623 to Code Compliance. That said, it should be noted that Code Compliance is sending $478,227 back to the General Fund. Therefore, unlike the first iteration, we now recommend the net contribution from the General Fund be reduced to zero, leading to a savings of $1,274,623 - $478,227 = $796,396.

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 17.3% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate; it would also cover 34.0% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget. This option could result in an approximate proportional reduction of 8 FTEs (again in the absence of specific salary data, exact FTE figures could not be determined), but only if the Board chooses not to raise fees.

OPTION 5: REDUCTION IN REGIONAL LIBRARY FUNDING

Spotsylvania Count naturally wishes to maintain good relations with neighboring jurisdictions, and regional agencies can go a long way toward achieving that goal. However, the current economic climate, combined with the county joining VRE this year, should provide some leeway (we would consider the same factor in recommending Option 7: Reduction of Regional Agency Funding by 25%).

In particular, Spotsylvania may want to suggest a postponement of the new regional library branch. While Stafford (which would host the branch) might express some angst for this, a postponement would allow them to more smoothly deal with their elimination of the BPOL tax.

Mr. Barnes himself noted in his initial response that there is some discussion among the Regional Library jurisdictions about postponing the new branch. We hope these talks continue and lead to an agreement to postpone. Spotsylvania’s portion of funding for the library system over FY11 comes to $597,799.

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 13.0% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate. This option was included in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget. No county staff reductions are required as a result of this option.

OPTION 6: SUSPENSION OF THE INCREASE TO THE CAPITAL RESERVE

The Capital Projects Fund is due to receive roughly $3.8 million from the General Fund in FY11 under the Fiscal Guidelines for the CIP, which call for step increases of 0.25% a year of revenues until the long-term goal of 5% is reached. Given the current economic circumstances, taking this step (from 1.5% to 1.75%) along this path may not be entirely wise.

In their responses, Messrs. Barnes and Pritchett expressed grave concern over the effect this would have on the County’s bond rating (Mr. Pritchett in particular noted county efforts to move up from AA to AAA). We fear there may have been some confusion in the initial iteration, which we regret. We do not recommend shifting the path, but rather skipping a step, and returning to it next year with a 2% set-aside.

At 1.75%, the transfer stands at $3,758,827. At 1.5%, it would be $3,221,852, for a savings of $536,975.

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 11.7% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate; it would also cover 22.9% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget. No staff reductions are required as a result of this option.

OPTION 7: REDUCTION IN REGIONAL AGENCY FUNDING BY 25%

While we did not include reducing non-Library regional funding initially, we are more than willing to accept – and in fact expand – the 10% reduction in regional funding in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget.

The reason we expanded the reduction to 25% was specifically related to one part of the Barnes 83-Cent Budget that did concern us, a $179,360 reduction in the School Fund Transfer. While we are also concerned about the Fire and Rescue de facto hiring freeze (we noted the reasons for our objections to both in the Executive Summary), we felt the School Fund Transfer reduction can be eliminated more easily with one option, and we chose this one.

The 25% reduction in regional funding leads to a savings of $393,290.

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 8.5% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate. As mentioned above, the Barnes 83-Cent Budget already has a 10% reduction here. The additional 15% would save $235,794 – or 10.1% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget. No county staff reductions are required as a result of this option.

OPTION 8: PLANNING DEPARTMENT EFFICIENCIES

The Planning Department is not as revenue-driven as Code Compliance; nor should it be. However, one would expect a relatively stable relationship between the revenue that comes in and the expenses that go out, even if that ratio is not 1 to 1.

However, in FY11, said stability is not to be found. Unlike any of the past nine years, the Barnes 86-Cent Budget calls for expenses to be more than two-and-a-half times that of incoming revenue. In fact, the highest previous spending-to-revenue ratio was 2 to 1 (in FY08), but the two subsequent years saw a steady decrease in that ratio, despite the Great Recession. That it would suddenly swell to 2.72 to 1 is counterintuitive. If revenues truly are to fall as low as Mr. Barnes believes, spending should likewise be reduced – not to a 1 to 1 basis, but at the very least to a ratio of FY10 (1.66 to 1).

A more robust relationship, based on the last ten years of data (FY01-FY10) would actually call for a more stringent ratio of 1.29 to 1. However, we are prepared to accept 1.66 to 1.

This ratio leads to the following:

Recommended Savings = Barnes Budget FY11 Expenditures – (FY11 Revenue * 1.66) = $976,541 – ($359,336 * 1.66) = $379,302

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 8.2% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate; it would also cover 16.2% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget. This option could result in an approximate proportional reduction of 5 FTEs (in the absence of specific salary data, exact FTE figures could not be determined), but only if the Board chooses not to raise fees.

OPTION 9: INFORMATION SERVICES EFFICIENCIES

The Department of Information Services (DIS) provides numerous information technology (IT) services for the county, including providing GIS data for the citizenry. The DIS table in the Barnes Budget notes 28.5 FTEs. However, 4 positions are to remain vacant, while the post of Operations Manager is slated to be filled for only half a year; so the effective FTE number is actually 24.

Mr. Barnes himself acknowledged in his responses to our first iteration that there were no new initiatives here. In effect, the county has decided, and wisely so, to make a strategic “pause” in new application development. Yet Mr. Barnes still states that the current number of Analysts (which, based on the last staff report from the FY09 budget, is five, although one of those positions is currently vacant) is necessary for maintenance of current systems. Traditional costing for software maintenance disputes this view (depending on the systems, maintenance tends to require between 12% and 18% of development cost). As such, we still believe one analyst is sufficient at this time.

We also continue to recommend that the Operations Manager position stay vacant for the entire year, and that the Deputy Director position be eliminated to streamline the top-heavy bureaucracy. Mr. Barnes noted in his response that the Deputy Director is currently running the Department, due to the Director being transferred to a different post. As such, we would recommend that, rather than funding both the Director and Deputy Director positions, the Deputy Director be promoted to Director.

It should also be noted that the GIS service was not examined here, in part because of a lack of data on the cost of the GIS to the IS Department. There may be potential to recoup staff losses here through an increase of fees, especially if the fees do not currently cover the GIS cost.

Barring a change in fees, this option leads to a total of 5½ positions, of which 4½ were funded in the Barnes 86-Cent Budget). Since two of them are vacant (the Operations Manager and one of the Analyst positions, the latter of which was not funded in the Barnes 86-Cent Budget), the actual loss to staff would be four – again, only if the GIS fees are left unchanged.

Because the detailed cost for each position was not given, used the following approach to gauge the effect on personnel cost (given the nature of DIS, Operating Cost was left alone):

Recommended Savings = Barnes Budget FY11 Personnel Cost * 4.5 / 24 = $1,869,936 * 4.5 / 24 = $305,613

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield roughly 7.6% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate. The Barnes 83-Cent Budget included a line item Hold Half-Year Positions Vacant Full-year, which would include the DIS Operations Manager. Because of the lack of specific detail on the Operations Manager position, it could not be determined how much of the $305,613 was covered in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget, and what would be left compared to the delta between the Barnes 83-Cent Budget and this set of recommendations.

SECTION 10: COUNTY ASSESSMENT EFFICIENCIES

The first iteration of this report included large efficiencies in the three “departments” of Finance, Treasurer, and Commissioner of Revenue (the latter two being not departments but constitutional offices). That recommendation inspired the most detailed and informative responses from Mr. Barnes, Mr. Pritchett, and Ms. Williams. We were very grateful for them, as several residents of Spotsylvania shared our initial concern about redundancies in these areas, and their responses helped clear up those concerns.

Within the County Assessment office, however, we still believe efficiencies are possible. There are few comparable counties to ours; in fact, only Stafford has the combination of comparable population and budget detail. However, the Stafford numbers are telling. Despite a roughly equal population to ours and a similar assessment cycle (biennial), Stafford’s level of appraisers stands at six, while ours is at ten. We acknowledge that Stafford has roughly 20% fewer parcels than Spotsylvania does. However, Stafford’s assessors handle, on average, nearly 4,100 parcels a year, over a third more than the 3,000 and change the average Spotsylvania assessor covered in FY10 (FY11 parcel data was not given in the budget).

This implies the county could conduct assessments with a staff of 7.5 FTEs rather than 10 (for a loss of 2.5). Without specific salary data, exact savings could not be determined; approximate savings would be:

Recommended Savings = Barnes Budget FY11 Personnel Cost * 7.5 / 10 = $844,428 * 0.75 = $211,107

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield 4.6% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate; it would also cover 9.0% of the $2.345M delta between this report and the Barnes 83-cent Budget.

SECTION 11: HUMAN RESOURCES EFFICIENCIES

The Department of Human Resources includes funds for a restored Director. The position was resurrected in the Barnes budget after being eliminated last year. While the resurrection of this position was not discussed in the Barnes 86-Cent Budget, Mr. Barnes did address it in his response to our initial report, for which we are grateful. We also agree with him that the responsibilities of this position should not be placed upon Deputy County Administrator Ernie Pennington on a permanent basis. As such, we are not asking for the permanent elimination of this position. If we can restore it in FY12, we should.

For now, however, we feel we must hold to our recommendation not to bring this position back this year, although we are adjusting the savings to accommodate for the $6,741 in personnel costs not driven by the restoration of this post. This leads to the following:

Recommended Savings = Barnes Budget FY11 Personnel Cost – (FY10 Personnel Cost + $7,586) = $556,084 – ($413,340 + $6,741) = $136,003

These savings, based on the funding effects of the property tax as described in the Executive Summary, would yield roughly 3.0% of the $4.605M required to achieve the equalized rate. This option was included in the Barnes 83-Cent Budget under “Delete HR Director and new DSS positions.” The HR piece of this line item is $136,003 (the DSS piece is addressed in Option 2). Because the position in question is already vacant, no staff reductions are required as a result of this option.

APPENDIX 1: OPTIONS NOT EXAMINED

In our analysis, there were some options that we did not consider, but that the Board might, such as Supervisor Emmitt Marshall’s idea for selling state land and, if necessary, helping to finance the sales for buyers. While the effect on this year’s budget is not clear, it would certainly improve the county’s financial position by (1) moving land from local ownership to private ownership, thus putting it on the tax rolls, and (2) reducing the net debt of the county if it is to become the creditor on these parcels. It is an option very worthy of the Board’s consideration.

A second possibility to consider is the exploration of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Indiana has offered HSAs as an option to its employees since 2005. Today, according to Governor Mitch Daniels, “over 70% of our 30,000 Indiana state workers chose it.” They “will save more than $8 million in 2010 compared to their coworkers in the old-fashioned preferred provider organization (PPO) alternative.”

As for the state itself:

Indiana will save at least $20 million in 2010 because of our high HSA enrollment. Mercer calculates the state's total costs are being reduced by 11% solely due to the HSA option.

Again, this may be more of a long-term budget strategy than one for FY11, but we think it’s worth a look.

APPENDIX 2: THE BARNES 83-CENT BUDGET

APPENDIX 3: ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS IN STATE AID – FY11

Last Chance- Come Vote for a New Spotsy GOP Chairman Tomorrow!

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:35:00 +0000

7:00pm sharp (or earlier) come to Riverbend High School on April 1, 2010 and vote for a successor to Chairman Bryce Reeves. A Mass Meeting is sort of like a convention except the votes are counted as one-person, one-vote rather than weighted votes. You must be present to vote, no proxies, no early voting.

You have three great choices: Scott Mellott, Steve Thomas or Claude Dunn.

Including 5 minute each speeches and vote tabulation(s) it should take between 45 minutes and 2 hours total of your attendance. The winner of the election must receive 50% +1 votes to win.

You must be a Spotsylvania registered voter and be willing to sign a Republican loyalty statement to be eligible to vote. A $5 voluntary donation is requested to cover the costs of renting the school and so on.

See you there fellow Republicans!

Spotsy Professor and Economic Development Authority Chairman Offer Plan to Lower Taxes in FY11 Budget

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 05:47:00 +0000

by D.J. McGuire and Steven Thomas

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SPOTSYLVANIA BUDGET SAVINGS

INTRODUCTION
Last month, Spotsylvania County Administrator Doug Barnes presented his recommendations for the Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) budget to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Barnes’ budget recommended a property tax rate of 86 cents per $100 valuation, which would be an increase of three cents over the equalization rate of 83 cents per $100. Earlier this month, the Board of Supervisor advertised a rate of 88 cents per $100, or five cents above equalization. However, one Supervisor who voted to advertise the higher rate – Emmitt Marshall of Berkeley District – expressed hope for a lower rate.

This report is meant to be a part of that effort. Amidst the many voices from county officials, politicians, and voters, this report shows the way for the Board of Supervisors to maintain vital services to the county as much as is humanly possible without imposing a tax increase in the property owners of the county.

The voices in favor of setting the tax at the equalized rate of 83 cents will be numerous, but possibly muffled. They will be the voices of homeowners already feeling the strain of plummeting home values not seen since the Great Recession. In this environment, many of them are wondering why they are being asked to give more and do with less by their local government in these trying times. Unfortunately, most of them will be constrained by obligations of work and family from making their voices heard.

The voices of some of these most vulnerable homeowners who will be hurt by the proposed tax hike will be among the most important in our community. They will be elderly on fixed incomes forced to decide between food and tax payments. They will be families pushed past the breaking point by the extra $50 a month paid to the county. The last property tax increase in 2008 drove many of them away; it should be no surprise that Spotsylvania proceeded to lead all of Virginia in the rate of foreclosures.

Furthermore, a tax increase will greatly damage the business community in the county. Unlike with residential property, commercial property values were almost perfectly stable on average. This means any rate higher than the current 62 cents – even the equalized rate – will be a large increase in cost for both commercial land owners and the businesses who rent from them. A rate of 86 or 88 cents will even more egregiously balance the budget on the backs of our business community.

The business community is one of the key factors to lead localities out of recession, yet businesses will be disproportionately hurt even by an equalized tax rate, let alone a net tax hike. Moreover, while commercial property values have remained steady during the downturn overall, the value of industrial land has actually increased. This means that the very businesses we depend on to keep our citizens employed – and out of foreclosure – will be suffer the most from a property tax hike. Many will move from Spotsylvania or close down, taking their jobs with them; many more simply won't come here in the first place. The recommendations we present in this report may cost the county government the equivalent of 51 jobs (7 of which are unfilled), but it may well save hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs in the private sector, along with many businesses generating activity – and local revenue. Otherwise, we risk being the only locality in the region to consider a tax hike during the Great Recession, with all the economic damage that comes with such a dubious honor.

We developed this report to prevent this damage. If the recommendations set forth in this report were fully implemented, it would actually lead to a rate below equalization. More likely, they provide the Supervisors with a number of choices from which they can build several budget alternatives at the equalized rate. This will require the Supervisors to make choices and set priorities for the county, but it will also make clear that the county’s elected officials do not intend to exacerbate the economic conditions by forcing homeowners to pay more, and businesses much more, in these trying times.

Sincerely,

D.J. McGuire
Republican Nominee for Lee Hill Supervisor – 2009

Steven Thomas
Spotsylvania Economic Development Authority Chairman and Member for Livingston District

- READ THE FULL DOCUMENT HERE -

Governor McDonnell Announces 43,000 Potholes Repaired in First Two Weeks of Pothole Blitz

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:20:00 +0000

VDOT Continues Repairing Potholes Statewide!

RICHMOND – Governor Bob McDonnell today announced that Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) crews have patched, repaired or filled more than 43,000 potholes throughout the commonwealth since it kicked off the agency’s pothole blitz March 1. Governor McDonnell directed VDOT to launch its pothole blitz and focus efforts on patching the thousands of potholes resulting from this winter’s harsh weather. VDOT crews have worked day and night to address pavement hazards reported by VDOT crews, contractors, and citizens.

“We know that potholes create more than bumpy rides for motorists. They are roadway hazards. VDOT has made great strides in addressing this year’s bumper crop of potholes, but there is still work to be done,” said Governor McDonnell. “I would like to thank the citizens that have helped by reporting potholes on VDOT’s Web site and by calling in as they see potholes develop in their travels. With everyone’s help, we continue making great progress.”
Potholes are continuing to form with this month’s wet weather and varying temperatures. As citizens contact VDOT and report each new pothole, crews are dispatched to work through assigned corridors and repairs are prioritized based on severity and location.
VDOT has budgeted $45.8 million for asphalt and concrete patching for fiscal year 2010 (which runs from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010).
To report a pothole, citizens should visit www.VirginiaDOT.org or call VDOT’s Highway Helpline at 800-367-7623 (ROAD). TTY users, call 711.

VDOT repairs potholes on state-maintained roads only, which include interstate highways and most primary and secondary roads. Local governments are responsible for repairing potholes on city streets as well as on roadways in Henrico and Arlington counties. If citizens see a pothole on a city street or an Arlington or Henrico County road, they should contact their local public works agency.
Safe driving tips, pothole patching videos, and other useful information on potholes is also available on VDOT’s Web site at http://www.virginiadot.org/info/faq-potholes.asp.

Over 50 Businesses and Agencies to Attend Congressman Rob Wittman's Job Fair Next Monday

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:30:00 +0000

What- you didn't get the mailer!? http://www.spotsygop.com/documents/WittmanJobs.pdf

Stafford, VA - On Monday, March 22, Congressman Rob Wittman will host a job fair at the University of Mary Washington's Stafford Campus. Companies and agencies attending have indicated that they have job openings for positions including marketing reps, mechanical, electrical, aerospace, chemical, computer engineers, accountants, administrators, secretarial, management, budget, sales, service, law enforcement, and more.

DATE: March 22, 2010 TIME: 10:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.

LOCATION: University of Mary Washington - Stafford Campus 125 University Boulevard, Fredericksburg, VA 22406 (Exit 133b toward Culpeper- Route 17N, west of I-95, 3 miles on left)

Companies and Organizations Attending (as of 3/15/10):

Chancellor University
5 Linx
Bureau of Prisons
Clearpoint Financial Solutions
Creative memories
Defense Contract Audit Agency
HCA Healthcare
Family Preservation Services
Home Instead Senior Care
MTCSC
Northrop Grumman
Social Security Administration
U.S. Army
Veterans Administration Wounded Warrior Program
U.S. Secret Service
U.S. Department of State
IMTS
New York Life
Task Force Staffing
Conscious Security
Immersive Media Tactical Solutions
Spotsylvania Regional Medical Center
Arbonne International
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Visiting Angels
U.S. Marine Corps
FBI
LEENC Resume Review
Averett University
Office of Personnel Management
Comfort Keepers
GEICO
Dept of Labor
Transportation Security Administration
UVA School of Medicine
DeVry Universit
Stafford County Sheriff's Office
VA State Policy
Defense Logistics Agency
Department of Commerce
Dove Chocolate Discoveries
VA Employment Commission
Car Max
NAVSEA - Dahlgren
Bureau of Economic Analysis - Department of Commerce
Bureau of Industry & Security - Department of Commerce
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - Department of Commerce
JOB.COM
Payne Trucking

Congressman Rob Wittman represents the First District of Virginia. He was elected to his first full term in November 2008 and serves on the Natural Resources Committee and the Armed Services Committee where he is the Ranking Member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

2010: A New Beginning of the Spotsylvania County Republican Committee! Part 1 of 2: A Few Reflections from the Vice-Chair

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 05:53:00 +0000

From the eyes of the 2008-2010 SCRC vice-chairman… that's me.

Over the past two years, the Spotsylvania County Republican Committee (SCRC) has been blessed to have a prosperous track record and a growing and great collection of volunteers. I hope this will not change and will continue its progress. (By the way, the pictures in this post are a hodgepodge of snapshots I've collected at various events to demonstrate the many things we do throughout the year on the committee. It's not all just election-day campaigning. It's SO much more! They're in no particular order...)

On April 1, 2010 we will vote for a new chairman and executive staff starting at 7pm at Riverbend High School. Three men are seeking the chairman's seat but the one who gets 50% +1 of the vote will assume the job the next day. He'll need a strong and dedicated vice-chairman to help him succeed. This blog entry is dedicated to that person and to those who he or she would come in contact with in the next two years.

This committee has grown from just a few dozen regular attending members in 2007 to nearly a hundred— with more new faces coming to each meeting in 2010 than ever before! Growth has come especially since the 2008 presidential defeat when I think it started to actually “sink in” that our country is indeed in trouble and the “someone” who should “do something” about it is staring at us right in the bathroom mirror.

These new faces didn't just happen to stumble across the committee though (well I hope not anyway.) For the most part, they were somehow touched in their lives by some program or outreach that we've done either in between election seasons or during them. Some were contacted by an active or passive member who participates in our committee at some level and invited, or they might have just simply "Googled" us. Either way... the groundwork was already laid by "someone else" to get them to the next committee meeting where they became enticed enough to come back again and join.

While serving as the SCRC vice-chairman, I’ve accepted a lot of grunt-work duties and tried to make lemonade from the lemons. In retrospect, it was all worth it, and I can hardly believe it’s already been 23 months since I was sworn in! I’ve been an integral part in fundraising, committee promotion, recruiting, marketing, blogging, campaigning, organizing volunteers, lobbying, organizing huge events, phone banking, sign building, t-shirt making, social networking, advising elected officials, liaison work within the business community, street activism both locally and nationally, making headlines … and making new friends too! And that’s just the tip of the iceberg… and I’m only the vice-chair!

Our chairman does MUCH more than this, but I’ll get to him in the next post. Stay tuned.

The SCRC is bountiful and blossoming in 2010 despite our community, state and national setbacks— most of which are financially related, but also spirit-related too. I’ve talked to literally hundreds of folks in the region about their fears and realities in life and what role that government leadership and politics plays in them. I believe most would agree, when an honest conversation can be had— free from party rhetoric, name-calling and mud-slinging— that the government presence in our daily lives has expanded from a potential presence to a seemingly permanent one.

No one I know on either side of the aisle feels that they are freer and have more opportunities than they did 10 or 20 years ago. Most feel like they are one step closer to being royal subjects than free to do as they wish in a free country. No this isn’t all Obama’s fault— this is a growing epidemic in all levels of government that started long before the "anointed one" took the helm. If there's anyone to blame, we have only ourselves for not becoming more involved in who's running our government, and our lives, at ALL levels... from the HOA to the school board, the board of supervisors, the state we live in and most certainly the federal levels of leadership.

As vice-chair, I get a lot of emails asking about what we do and what is expected of our members. I love getting them! I try to get others involved and activated any time I can. This is the only way to get true community involvement in OUR government right??

Across the board, as I typically get around to what amounts to a recruiting speech for one conservative cause or another, the endgame responses I get usually contain, “I don’t have the free time”, “I wouldn’t be good at that sort of thing”, “someone else will do it won’t they?” “I don’t follow that sort of stuff (politics)”, “that’s what I elect other people for so they can worry about these things” and so forth.

BUT once in a while, I am fortunate to find a diamond in the rough, often with groups of younger people who aren’t as committed to the chains of adult responsibility yet; and we seem to be able to move mountains together with only the slightest direction and leadership. These are the moments I live for. These are the moments that make volunteering for a Republican Committee worth while… when I realize I’m not alone and I don’t have to do all the heavy lifting myself. There's actually "someone else" to help me!

Thanks to the committees I’ve served on or the groups I've given a talk or speech with, I’ve made friends that I know I’ll be in touch with for many years to come. Not all of them staunch Republicans either! Surprisingly, I’ve learned that not every Republican is an angel, and not every Democrat is a demon as MSNBC and FOX would have us all believe. I actually met a staunch Democrat named Angel working for a conservative Republican's campaign though. My head is still spinning from that one but it did answer the question, "can't we all just get along?"

YES WE CAN! (...MOST LIKELY)

In good economic times, it’s very hard to convince people that they need to join up with a conservative political committee to “keep what we have” and fend off those who would take from us and redistribute our collective wealth to others who don’t want to work for it. After all, there’s no immediate threat to anyone and it sounds like “boogeyman” talk. Folks get complacent quickly it seems. I’m supposing it’s because they didn’t help out then, and things are good for them— so why change?

When tides turn and the county is scraping for cash to provide the same level of service at the same time our families are losing jobs, while interest rates go up and credit gets scarce; people tend to look out for themselves first and leave the politicing to “the other guys”! This too is a seemingly impossible time to ask a neighbor to invest their time and resources in something greater than self, when they are legitimately concerned that they can’t provide food for their families.

In the past two years we’ve shared in good times and bad. We’ve had both victories and defeats both locally and nationally as a political party. But you’re reading this blog now and hopefully have been for a few years now since we started it, so I’m going to assume you know this already.

CHANGE WE CAN ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN!

I say all this to be brutally honest to the next vice-chair… to do this job right, you have to DEDICATE yourself to it, or you’ll let a lot of people down. I’m a firm believer in term-limits from a citizen-run government, or quasi-government group. It’s time for that “someone else” to step up and take the job, and I’m hoping that YOU will consider doing so. Yes YOU!

Victory favors the bold, but elections are won by those WHO SHOW UP.

Will you be the next SCRC vice-chairman or will you trust that “someone else” will do it for you?

If you won't step up that far to actually do the job, I'm asking as a favor to that person who does... please volunteer your time to the committee and its related causes that you're called upon to help with. If you can't do that for some reason, please send a financial donation in your absence to lighten the load of those fantastic volunteers with whom I've come to admire and respect. They don't usually get a fancy title, but they ARE doing the heavy lifting for ALL OF US.

Spotsylvania County Republican Committee 2010 Mass Meeting April 1 at 7:00pm- Riverbend HS, Pre-Register here

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:18:00 +0000

Announcement!

Attend and vote* at the 2010 Republican Mass Meeting, April 1, 2010 at Riverbend High School, at 7:00p.m., by pre-registering via this form: [click here].

This meeting is open to the public, however only qualified registered voters may cast a vote. Are you interested in learning more and becoming an active participant in your county, how it's run and managed, and the Republican Party of Virginia? Why not attend our next committee meeting?

A voluntary $5 donation is requested to cover the expenses of the Mass Meeting.

*subject to eligibility and verification by credentials committee.

Bill HB 393 To Regulate Unregulated Abortion Centers Passes Virginia House of Delegates

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:14:00 +0000

from The Family Foundation:

Yesterday, the House of Delegates passed by a vote of 72-25 HB 393, patroned by Delegate Matt Lohr (R-26, Harrisonburg), a bill that would put unregulated abortion centers under three simple regulations: licensure, an annual inspection and to have life saving equipment on premises, such as defibrillators.

In the floor debate on the bill’s second read yesterday, when bills in the House are debated, opposition came from one of the General Assembly’s biggest pro-abortion advocates, Delegate David Englin (D-45, Alexandria). He tried to make the case that unregulated abortion centers are regulated. But Delegate Lohr correctly replied that, if so, then the simple requirements in the bill would not be cause for concern to the abortion centers. Delegate Englin then tried to paint a picture of hypocrisy by stating that doctors’ offices of various specialties are not regulated by the state. However, as Delegate Lohr responded, specific boards govern each medical specialty. But there are no recognized boards that institute standards for abortionists.

As I told the media yesterday, the General Assembly Building where members of the General Assembly work currently has external defibrillators available for emergencies. Virginia’s unregulated abortion centers do not. To ask a medical facility that performs invasive surgical procedures that include the use of anesthesia to simply have what the General Assembly building has seems reasonable to most Virginians. But the lucrative, billion dollar abortion industry rejects even this most simple safety measure.

At the same time the abortion industry is attempting to regulate pregnancy resource centers – facilities that do not do invasive medical procedures – they are fighting against even the most basic standards for themselves. The hypocrisy is obvious to anyone willing to look.

The bipartisan vote yesterday was one of the largest margins in recent history. The bill now goes to the Senate where it most likely will be referred to the Education and Health Committee. Although pro-life bills typically meet a dismal fate there, we will continue to fight for – and ask your help in those battles – on just bills, such HB 393, and continue to spotlight the lawmakers who prove to be grossly out of step with mainstream Virginia.

Please forward this e-mail to friends and family who you think are interested in issues affecting traditional values and encourage them to sign up for alerts at www.familyfoundationblog.com/?page_id=162

Democrats Sneak Behind Closed Doors to Ramrod Healthcare Bill Down America's Throat

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:52:00 +0000

Congrats! Your Family Just Went $1.1 Trillon in Debt ... Again. "Change in Washington" is Here for Generations to Come Thanks to Obama's Omnibus Bill.

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:09:00 +0000

from Bearing Drift: Virginia Politics On Demand- by J.R. Hoeft:

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate passed the omnibus spending bill of $1.1 trillion, loaded with earmarks and spending for government agencies, while this week the House will likely vote to raise the debt ceiling.

The 1,088-page package contains over 5,000 earmarks, including provisions to transfer Guantanamo Bay detainees to the United States, as well as provisions to allow taxpayer funded abortions and the legalization of marijuana in the District of Columbia.

Democrats would also like to raise the debt ceiling from its current $12.1 trillion level by an additional $1.8 trillion, as we’re due to break the current barrier by the end of the year.

Clearly government spending has always been the best way to create jobs over our nation’s 233 year history. Certainly our country wasn’t built on hard work, initiative, common sense, innovation, and enterprise. We always have looked to the government to make it better for us.

According to the Peter Peterson Foundation, 80% of voters nationwide rank “dealing with our growing budget deficit and national debt” a high priority, while health care reform (56%) and cutting taxes (51%) rank much lower as a priority. Additionally, 7 out of 10 voters support a bipartisan commission to develop budget, spending and tax reforms to be voted on by Congress. Check out their web site on the debt at http://www.knowthedebtfacts.com/.

At least some in congress understand the great danger the government is putting us in by its continued back-breaking deficits, including careening us towards a $1 trillion health care bill, by continuing to propose the SAFE Commission.

Both Rep. J. Randy Forbes and Rep. Frank Wolf from Virginia support such a reform. According to Forbes:

The SAFE Commission Act, H.R. 1557, would establish a Commission that would review federal spending and develop legislation designed to address: (1) the unsustainable imbalance between long-term federal spending commitments and projected revenues; (2) increases in net national savings to provide for domestic investment and economic growth; (3) the implications of foreign ownership of federally issued debt instruments; and (4) revision of the budget process to place greater emphasis on long-term fiscal issues.

That’s clearly a “long view”, but the right view. Unfortunately, for the past decade, Congress has wasted budget surpluses and has continued spending money the U.S. just doesn’t have; in doing so, we have threatened future generations with an unavoidable crisis, and may be doing more to eliminate our existence and way of life than Al Qaeda ever could.

The entire Democratic delegation from Virginia: Reps. Glenn Nye, Gerry Connolly, Bobby Scott, Rick Boucher, and Tom Perriello, as well as Sens. Warner and Webb, voted in favor of the bill. Rep. Jim Moran missed the vote.

Harry and the Peacemakers. Be still my heart!

noreply@blogger.com (Gail) — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 02:17:00 +0000

I'll call this an "open letter" to VA's Senators, Jim Webb and Mark Warner.

Did either of you hear the speech (better known as another pack of lies) spew from the lips of your illustrious leader, Harry Reid? I notice there hasn't been any comment from either of you. That worries me; the fact that he lied with such a straight face and no comments from you. Really scarey. I realize you're both of the democrat persuasion but you still work for ALL the people in this state. Or, are you so wrapped up in the Progressive movement you've already distanced yourself from your constituents? So far, we're waiting and watching, and waiting...

I would strongly advise you to inform your leader that a lot of us are now aware that he flunked whatever history class he ever attended. It wasn't the Republicans that wanted anything to do with slavery; history says it was the Democrats. Oh, yeah, almost forgot; it was also the Democrats that fought against the civil rights movement. He really needs to do his homework before he opens his big mouth.

This is my little comparison to what you folks are doing in DC. A funny thing happened on my way to get the checkbook out of my husband's desk. He always tells me of our bank balance and I then go on my merry way to shop for whatever is needed but not going bonkers just because I'm now in possession of the checkbook. This time, however, he told me to "take it easy", to "slow down"... What? Silly Repub. He just doesn't get it that we may not have a lot of money but the MORE I spend the better off we'll be! I thought you'd see the humor in my revelation. He didn't. Daggummit. I figured if it was good enough for you guys, then it had to be good enough for me. God knows I tried!

You see, gentlemen, it's the same old song and dance. The only difference I see is that depending on who "you-know-who" (the one with the worthless Peace Prize?) is talking to, his accent changes. Honest. Pay attention some time. It's interesting. It's all relative, too. You tell the group of people you're trying to convince of your goodness and your operating skills, and your ability to manipulate, blah, blah, and then you move on the next group of zombies.

Before I bid you farewell, did you also notice that the music died back in November of this year. That'd be the day the Commonwealth of Virginia sent you a strong message. Were you listening? Really.

Planned Parenthood to Ask Virginia General Assembly to Approve Pro-Abortion License Plates!

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:06:00 +0000

That's right- if you can't get enough abortion in your life- and you could care less if your baby is stabbed in the skull by a profiteer proclaiming to be a doctor with your best interests in mind, then by all means- YOU should buy a pro-abortion license plate to support Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia!

What will your delegate vote when this is presented for approval? Have you called and asked him/her?

cross posted on RappahannockRepublic.com .

Rep. Rob Wittman Comments on Obama's Afghanistan Decision

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:14:00 +0000

Cross-Posted on RappahannockRepublic.com
Our very own President Barack "teleprompter" Obama finally made his speech tonight... officially... I've never seen a president, or any leader of significance, get so much press out of making a press release a week prior to making a press release! The Main Stream Media (MSM) has been touting the significance of tonight's speech for days and pre-spewing all the talking points right on key for ole Barry, so that tonight's message would have been thoroughly debated and discussed among Americans before it was ever given!

Using this methodology, akin to the gossiping equivalent of leaking a secret, the administration can field test America's feedback without ever talking an official poll. Once a pulse is taken from Rush, Hannity, Beck and the rest, the speech can be tweaked accordingly to placate the naysayers and support the popular buzz words and talking points that are now days old and well rehearsed. If you supported his message all along then you would have heard nothing new and would likely nod along with the familiar words. But if you opposed his original message from the start, you've already burned up your audience's attention span to the subject and if the speech were adjusted to counteract your comments, why then you were wrong all along and they can say that you overreacted or have lost credibility!

...Pretty smart of Team Abercrombie & Fitch from a strategy standpoint, but one U.S. Congressman isn't buying the B.S. of B.H.O.!

This evening, Congressman Rob Wittman released the following statement regarding the President’s decision on the way ahead in Afghanistan:

“I’m pleased that the President has come to a decision on the future strategy of our forces in Afghanistan and I fully support the deployment of additional troops and resources to aid in the fight against extremists. However, I am concerned with the mention of any sort of hard and fast time table. This simply sends the wrong message to the civilian population and provides a time clock for al-Qaeda and the Taliban to wait for our departure. We need to remember that the reason we went to Afghanistan was to eliminate al-Qaeda and provide freedom to an oppressed nation, and we should not leave until that job is finished. I have full faith and confidence in our military leadership and our troops that they will successfully complete this mission and I call on the President, Congress, and our Allies to provide them the tools to get the job done.”

Democratic Congressional Candidate Krystal Ball Blinks Herself Into Incoherencyesness For 7 Minutes Today on MSNBC

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:36:00 +0000

It's for the children (and Uranium stocks my husband cashes in on) that I'm running. Oh, and my international bank donors and out-of-state special interest groups that I wish to serve America's teachers. As a swimmer in college, I've learned a lot about business and creating jobs too (like one for me if I'm elected... it'll be my first outside the home, so give me a shot will ya?)

...wait just a second, who did the "reporter" say Krystal is running against?! This is when you know "news" media has hit rock bottom. When a show host is so lazy and ill informed that he can't get the name right of her opponent... OR the military rank! We can beat the guy up for his political ideology later, but let's at least honor his military service appropriately!

Stupid, Stupid MSNBC liberals!

Oh yeah! I knew I'd seen this kind of eye batting training before somewhere... Krystal's idol, Nancy "I'll kill your grandma with pain killers and give your daughter an abortion before I shorten the lines at the government healthcare rationing clinic" Pelosi:

Spotsylvania and Stafford County, Virginia November 3, 2009 Election Results

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:34:00 +0000

Final Results listed as "Unofficial" on Nov 4, 2009

SPOTSYLVANIA COUNTY, VIRGINIA ELECTION RESULTS November 3, 2009:

Board of Supervisors:
Spotsy-- Battlefield District: Yakabouski v. Pitts = 45.57% v 54.28%
Battlefield: 328 v 623
Brents Mill: 526 v 525
Fairview: 715 v 711

Spotsy-- Lee Hill District: McGuire v Skinner = 42.26% v 57.57%
Summit: 769 v 1068
Frazers Gate: 456 v 553
Lee Hill: 491 v 694

Spotsy-- Berkeley District: Marshall- unopposed

School Board:
Spotsy-- Battlefield District: Braswell v Weiland= 49.45% v 50.31%
Battlefield: 369 v 523
Brents Mill: 499 v 461
Fairview: 716 v 636

Spotsy-- Lee Hill District: Blalock- unopposed

Spotsy-- Berkeley District: Seaux- unopposed

State Offices:
Governor: McDonnell v Deeds
17,685 v 8,128 SPOTSY 68.42% v 31.44%
19,139 v 9,207 STAFFORD 67.40% v 32.42%

Lt. Governor: Bolling v Wagner
17,079 v 8,454 SPOTSY 66.81% v 33.07%
18,275 v 9,751 STAFFORD 65.15% v 34.76 %

Attorney General: Cuccinelli v Shannon
16,733 v 8,753 SPOTSY 65.58% v 34.30%
18,215 v 9,860 STAFFORD 64,82% v 35.09%

Delegate Cole-- unopposed

Delegate Peace-- unopposed

Delegate Orrock-- unopposed

STAFFORD COUNTY, VIRGINIA ELECTION RESULTS November 3, 2009:

Board of Supervisors:
Stafford-- Aquia District: Milde v Ortiz v Egan 50.73% v 33.53% v 15.57%
1,958 v 1,294 v 601

Stafford-- Garrisonville District: Dudenhefer v Sellers 62.73% v 36.88%
1,835 v 1,079

Stafford-- Falmouth District: Osborn v Filler v Stimpson 21.84% v 28.04% v 50.05%
1,057 v 1,357 v 2,422

Stafford-- Hartwood District: Snellings v Brito v Goss 54.58% v 36.38% v 8.71%
2,673 v 1,782 v 427

Delegate Cole-- unopposed

Delegate Bill Howell v Craig Ennis = 76.44% v 22.98%
12,093 v 3,636

Why VRE, As Offered, is a Bad Deal for Spotsylvania by Supervisor Candidate Chris Yakabouski

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:58:00 +0000

Fitz Johnson’s op-ed “How can Republicans be trying to derail VRE?” (op-ed, Oct 22) offers a self-absorbed perspective on VRE that is typical of those who will enjoy a special benefit if Spotsylvania taxpayers bail out VRE. As a candidate for public office, my perspective on this issue is grounded entirely on what is in the public interest.

On August 18, 2009, the Spotsylvania County Board of supervisors voted to join VRE but left it up to the new Board to ratify or reject this deal after the election. I will vote to reject this deal because VRE is dealing from the bottom of the deck and the role of sucker was assigned to Spotsylvania taxpayers. This “deal” is forever. There is no escape and no way to modify its terms regardless of how harmful it is to the County and its residents.

The “deal” touted by Supervisors Pitts and Skinner, unless stopped, would be the most lopsided anti-taxpayer agreement ever entered into by Spotsylvania. Some of the people sounding off are claiming the language of the deal says what it doesn’t say and many of the loudest proponents will personally profit at the long-term expense of the taxpayers of Spotsylvania. I am all for free enterprise and maximizing profits but I absolutely will not stand for people unfairly doing so at the risk and expense of working Spotsylvania families.

After I hear about all the wonderful virtues of VRE, I find myself thinking why not? Sounds ok! What’s wrong with commuter rail? Who wouldn’t want free money for local roads? Who wouldn’t want to bring high paying jobs home to Spotsylvania? Those are the promises and they sound great. But before signing on the dotted line, lets look at what we are getting into and see whether those promises are real or just more pie-in-the-sky offered up by people who stand to make a lot of money at taxpayer expense or who think leadership is figuring out a new way to separate taxpayers from yet another dollar. So let’s have a look, shall we?

The first promise is that joining VRE will miraculously spur economic growth in Spotsylvania. According to the VRE visionaries, high-tech businesses will sprout like mushrooms if only Spotsylvania will impose a new gas tax and pay millions to subsidize VRE. Of course, this pie-in-the-sky promise is easily refuted by simply looking at VRE’s impact on economic development in nearby communities over the past 20 years. Obviously, the dilapidated Fredericksburg VRE station has attracted nothing but problems. VRE’s presence couldn’t even save a struggling restaurant located on top of the VRE station! Look North to Lorton in Fairfax. Several years back Lorton prison closed and the land cleared for development. There was already a VRE station nearby and so one would expect tons of these wonderful businesses to locate in this virgin area. Business parks must dot the landscape where the prison once stood, right? No. Only houses. Lots and lots of houses and lots and lots of people and as much traffic congestion as anyone could want. Lorton is much closer to D.C. than we are, but the high paying jobs didn’t materialize.

Ok, let’s look at Leeland Station in Stafford. This station is located in southern Stafford and had little development around it -- no houses, strip malls, and barely any traffic. This location is very similar to what we have around the proposed VRE station site in Spotsylvania. If you believe Supervisors Pitts and Skinner, Stafford surely must have attracted a huge first class business park with high paying jobs and associated benefits. Drive through sometime. No businesses, just more houses. Promises are one thing, reality another.

Another promise is free money for roads. But if you look at where this free money comes from, it disappears. First, the VRE agreement requires a new gas tax to be forced upon our taxpayers -- teachers, deputies, retired folks, stay at home moms, single moms and dads, those who have lost their jobs, as well as everyone else who drives a car. But at least our roads will be improved, right? Not so much. Every dollar raised by the gas tax is earmarked for VRE, period. There is no language in the proposed agreement protecting the taxpayers of Spotsylvania County. There is no minimum amount Spotsylvania is slated to receive. Instead, the County doesn’t get a dime until the full VRE fee is paid for. Spotsylvania gets the crumbs if anything is left, a huge bill if the tax falls short. And, the dirty little secret Pitts and Skinner try to hide is that if the gas tax falls short, Spotsylvania County would be legally required to raise taxes or cut services to pay the bill.

VRE sounds great. So do flying cars. But neither is a good thing upon which to bet the farm. I am all for improving traffic, and when I served on the Board of Supervisors the county received millions of dollars of traffic funds because of the many good projects which were approved. But in each of those cases, the development benefitted both the developer and the county – all were specifically designed to increase business development and solve traffic problems at the same time. For example the continuous turn lane off Route I-95 at the Spotsylvania exit was paid for, and built from a proffer by the Silver Companies. These are real improvements.

The lofty promises made by the VRE cheering squad hide a bad deal for the citizens of Spotsylvania. And the truth is, I am not opposed to joining VRE if it is a good deal for the taxpayers of Spotsylvania. In the middle of a recession, a mandatory gas tax coupled with a no-escape deal sounds like a terrible idea. As an elected official it is my responsibility to make sure our county is better off when I leave office than when was elected to office. I do not think this current agreement is in the best interest of all our citizens.

—Chris Yakabouski

The writer is the Republican Candidate for the Spotsylvania Board of Supervisors in the Battlefield District

Fmr. NY City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to Visit Fredericksburg Promoting Bob McDonnell's Candidacy for Governor This Coming Wednesday!

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:50:00 +0000

WHEN: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:30am

Former presidential candidate and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani will make a campaign stop for/with Bob McDonnell at the Spotsylvania joint-GOP Headquarters located at 7 Butler Road Stafford, VA 22405 (the corner of Route 17 (aka Warrenton Road, aka Butler Road) and Route 1 just north of the Falmouth Bridge.)

Be there bright and early to cheer Bob to victory November 3rd!

Bookmark this blog if you want Spotsylvania County, VA election results on November 3, 2009

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:36:00 +0000

We'll be live blogging from the polls with up to the minute voting results (we plan to anyway!) Check back here to see how Spotsylvania County blazes the trail for conservative Republican financial values for the whole state!

Steve Shannon Dodges Questions at Debate and Doesn't Know Answers to Simple AG Questions!

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:08:00 +0000

This guy wants to be our Attorney General?? What an ass! He gets his supporters to shoot flashes into a guy's video camera! That could easily blow the circuitry and they know this. Coward!

Steve Shannon. Epic Fail!

Creigh Deeds Promises on Camera to Raise Our Taxes If Elected

noreply@blogger.com (Eric Martin) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:46:00 +0000