Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, February 23, 1993 TAG: 9302230061
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: THOMAS BAKER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
BUDGET WORK GOING DOWN TO THE WIRE
Budgetary matters finally gained some of the headlines in Richmond last week. During the coming few days, both the House and the Senate will finalize work on each other's legislation while the budget conferees hammer out the final details of the state's spending for the next fiscal year.There also have been some big-ticket items passed by the legislature this year that may have an adverse effect on the state budget. Among the potential budget culprits is the new family court program, an outgrowth of a pilot program conducted in various parts of the state. This bill has been passed by the House and likely will pass the Senate.
In essence, there will be a new court created to handle all juvenile and domestic cases. The juvenile and domestic relations courts typically handle juvenile cases and child support matters and the circuit court deals with divorce cases. The family court will combine all such cases under its jurisdiction.
As proposed, the creation of this court will necessitate the hiring of 25 new judges, 90 new clerks, and the raising of juvenile judges' salaries by several thousand dollars per year to bring them in line with what circuit court judges receive.
The annual cost of this new court, in addition to the current operating costs, will be $7.5 million a year. There is no money appropriated for this, nor is there a funding mechanism in the bill itself. Even worse, if additional courthouse space, equipment and supplies are needed, the localities will have to foot the bill.
This measure, in essence, is trying to fix something many of us do not think is broken. I voted against this bill in committee and on the floor. Next year the legislature will be asked to raise all court fees $3 to help pay the $7.5 million tab. However, this will offer no help to the localities with their expenses.
On a positive note, return of $20 million in deed recordation taxes has won approval in the House and has been sent on to the Senate. Although $40 million was promised to be returned by the 1989 General Assembly, $20 million will be returned next year and each year thereafter. The 1989 law would have ended the return of these monies after five years.
The passage of this bill will result in Pulaski County receiving approximately $35,000, the city of Radford approximately $19,000 and Giles County roughly $13,000.
Unfortunately, the governor's high-profile campaign against guns has kept the General Assembly from spending any real time addressing school-funding disparity.
Pulaski County, Giles County and Radford stand to receive less money this year because of the basic funding formula. The disparity initiatives placed in the budget last year help, but don't do enough to offset the basic reduction in money from the state because of the loss of enrollment.
For instance, Giles County will be down roughly $137,000 in basic funding from last year under the governor's proposed budget. Without the disparity initiative, Giles would be down about $257,000. Pulaski County will be down about $170,000 and would be down about $445,000 without the initiatives. Radford will be down roughly $77,000 and otherwise would have been down about $130,000.
Both the House and the Senate have proposed raises for college professors and state employees and both have provided for raises for public school teachers. The Senate plan is basically more generous. If it is adopted, Pulaski County, Giles County and Radford will receive an additional $148,000, $78,000 and $37,500, respectively, in state education money. If the House version is adopted, Pulaski County, Giles County and Radford will receive $114,000, $58,000 and $31,000 respectively.
I favor the Senate version of raises for teachers and state employees and hope the budget conferees will propose its adoption.
Keywords:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1993