[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6370846,"mediaKeyId","2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec","parentId",2150763,"title","St. Mary's County projects $2.4 million FY2011 shortfall; staff proposes $1M stabilization, $500K emergency reserve","audioSeconds",66,"startMs",74000,"endMs",7935,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec&start=74&end=7","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec/thumbnail_74000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6370846/St-Marys-County/Maryland/St-Marys-County-projects-24-million-FY2011-shortfall-staff-proposes-1M-stabilization-500K-emergency-reserve","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6370846-07365528fccda2788fadd213852f5614/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189144&Signature=SO5uX~SRiW66-~s8ykWtBTx9ptMzwCKKADR4n9XfZXrIxZgGkLpkVtf2ME5G6LOHS8Z05IECEay6BFMfQt7mRVz-4zofy2YI~yw4Akv6xndSbza2x-66uLmaGOt9KeGilJkJq63ooTvnsa-vRQOEdggWyZYlXXKE2ZlmgJ-oSobD5NqJf4KVMuwKESVTuDciVzbfKO-SGuz6w3uSVBpCrmUaAUm7baYWeh4z9EYT8ueCRlLmXR5pCyyhijWF6m020JcK7YyOirtMLnb3EIEy6AlEaxIHlCuOahumXhPtFHeIE6QYHcxiFM6BUeZnx~d~Sopi5uyr6eF20ldpZ0VZ-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","St. Mary's County, MD","date","2025-01-26T19:39:56Z","article","County finance staff told the Board of County Commissioners at a March 8 work session in the Chesapeake Building that the draft FY2011 budget currently shows $188,627,980 in revenue and an unbalanced gap of roughly $2,400,000.

Miss Kramer, a finance staff presenter, summarized the revenue outlook and reserves, saying, “We are, at this point in time, we have a shortfall, an unbalanced budget, a shortfall of $2,400,000.” She told commissioners the draft includes using $3,500,000 of fund balance as revenue replacement and that staff proposes a $1,000,000 revenue stabilization reserve and a $500,000 emergency appropriations reserve.

Why it matters: the draft assumes a property tax environment shaped by the state’s constant‑yield calculation. Kramer said the county’s current property tax rate is 0.857 and the constant‑yield tax rate calculated by the state would be 0.8192, which staff estimates would cause a revenue loss of about $4,070,741 and, after secondary effects, closer to $4.3 million. Income tax receipts are also down: staff’s working estimate for FY2011 income tax revenue is $60,000,000, a decline from prior expectations.

Staff presented the math behind the totals and noted several shifting elements that widen the budget gap: lower investment income, reduced state grant funding (which depresses both revenues and the associated expenditures), and large variability in highway‑user distributions from the state. Kramer also noted an outstanding request from the Office of the Sheriff: $1,154,921 in additions above the target that were not included in the base subtotal on the budget summary and that commissioners should consider when finalizing the recommended budget.

Discussion and next steps: commissioners and staff discussed options to close the gap. Staff pointed to the packet of department submissions showing potential 7% reductions, amounting to roughly $5.1 million in candidate cuts across departments and elected offices; many of those savings would require reductions in filled positions. Commissioners directed staff to return with prioritized scenarios and additional detail before the next work session. Several commissioners said they wanted more time to review the submissions; others expressed support for holding the sheriff’s above‑target request for further review while staff refines options.

No formal decisions were adopted at the session. Staff laid out a timetable: more focused work sessions are scheduled for March 15 and March 22, after which the board will move toward adopting a recommended budget for public hearing. Kramer and other staff committed to return with refined revenue scenarios, updated pension and health‑insurance estimates when they are available, and a prioritized list of possible reductions and fee changes for commissioner consideration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","3/8/2010 CSMC Budget Work Session","oneSentenceSummary","County finance staff told the Board of County Commissioners at a March 8 work session that the FY2011 draft budget shows $188,627,980 in revenues but an estimated $2.4 million shortfall; staff proposed a $1 million revenue stabilization reserve and a $500,000 emergency reserve.","taxTitle","St. Mary's County, Maryland","taxId",51086,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6370837,"Commissioners ask staff for fee‑impact estimates for solid‑waste and STS fares to help close budget gap",3115,2814000,5929000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec&start=2814&end=5929","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec/thumbnail_2814000.jpg","/articles/6370837/St-Marys-County/Maryland/Commissioners-ask-staff-for-feeimpact-estimates-for-solidwaste-and-STS-fares-to-help-close-budget-gap","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6370837-5204d845855b833124356e4acb1a828c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189144&Signature=JpSIAPBd0mMS04GmgRbLsiyV03ci7ZDCOVNGEfuk6Mik5kC6JYWmyjFRNOe0-ZOI2NkbsptEL858y~CO1KT5Ta1VdpZzI3RnFLmD0~ao~s7OcjgcKGSUMOo7KL4Zq1IhabFGRrq4KOM3V9IN6RLuQ3Lt8nscIKsKklblSZBUJqytVTf4zicjKwdpCTXIY-BD2Fa0stT~WY1Rg80XJeUrlDtldIt73W2zPz7Sbx6Fx0Cti93kwMO2j6uUYasKndVG3nVUC2gtr6kah4vOaYGBHc2K4ZGc5hSMp6eAhO6EbZp63yFISt2qVS6NGE0rl2949O8LVhqPNZbuQRnUJqEioA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County staff identified fee changes as potential revenue options to reduce the FY2011 shortfall and commissioners asked for incremental revenue estimates to inform decisions.

George Erickson, public works/transportation staff, told the board that the county has examined its solid‑waste fee and STS (Special Transportation Service) fares and could model revenue impacts by small incremental changes. Erickson said the solid‑waste fund subsidy from the general fund is growing and that raising the residential fee would reduce that subsidy. He responded to commissioners that, based on the county’s counts, “For every $5 that we increase the solid waste fee, we will generate an additional $189,400.”

On STS fares, Erickson said ridership sensitivity is an important constraint but that modest fare increases can generate meaningful revenue. He gave a staff estimate that “for every quarter that we increase the fees for STS, it should generate about 70 to 75,000 for each quarter,” adding that modeling can show the revenue impacts of $0.25, $0.50 or other increments.

Commissioners asked staff to prepare detailed increment tables showing: the revenue gained per $5 increase in solid‑waste fees; revenue by 25¢ and 50¢ changes to STS fares; estimated elasticity (ridership decline) scenarios; and examples of zone‑ or mileage‑based fare structures. Staff agreed to return with firm calculations for the March 15 work session.

No fee increases were approved on March 8; commissioners directed staff to present the modeled scenarios as part of the package of options to close the budget gap.","Staff presented fee options as revenue levers: raising the residential solid‑waste fee and incremental increases to the county’s STS transit fares. Public works provided quick revenue estimates and commissioners asked for more precise scenarios to consider during budget work sessions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6370841,"County reviews non‑public school bus contract baseline, proposed rate increases and deferred vehicle replacements",1017,4698000,5715000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec&start=4698&end=5715","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2150763-b3cb8cd19b1805e86f61314888a4f7ec/thumbnail_4698000.jpg","/articles/6370841/St-Marys-County/Maryland/County-reviews-nonpublic-school-bus-contract-baseline-proposed-rate-increases-and-deferred-vehicle-replacements","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6370841-6a8ea57a75479b8cdbb514c339bae11d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189144&Signature=I0qEWX2RE-EXRL53mW8rOI-ufny1UouIy4AuDhlWcrQZHw1zsvm7hQIpXYquEb5kRWD3qMODC2hJ~sr~lcPoP2IMRMgSf623M0qWjLuhpvYrLeIzL9u-xtrRx0qdMYSJ4Ds0gh3h~OE8-dvRblWv7HMsuh0vPMpp~aFUSqehX89zei1R6kavQH-cW9yR~~zG7CD7mCEX0Eu~M1NMvT~ByJNFruMGTCmfLp8o5c9iw04fcf3l0AvocyM5-eek2VHP~LmBlURoXdTW-Qdg0Mo-JECOx9VVPhYDkDd7HBFZHkjsyj4ezsozKkWNEHuzw45SS2EldwOzYkgE~5EooQ6skA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Public works and transportation staff walked the Board of County Commissioners through baseline and proposed numbers for the county’s non‑public school bus contracts, identifying driver pay tiers, maintenance factors and vehicle replacement timing.

George Erickson, a transportation staff member, explained the contractor pay structure and operational factors. “What you basically have in your non public school bus contracts, are several different items. The first are tier 1 and tier 2 driver salaries. Tier 1…drivers that have less than 10 years of experience. And tier 2 drivers have greater than 10 years of experience,” Erickson said. In the baseline he presented, tier‑1 pay is shown as $14.03 per hour and tier‑2 as $14.70; the board‑of‑education rates cited for comparison were $14.44 and $15.11, respectively.

Erickson walked commissioners through the operational and maintenance (O&M) factor calculations that drive per‑mile reimbursements. He said the baseline uses an O&M factor of about 1.03 for diesel buses and 1.19 for gasoline buses; the board‑of‑education figures in the proposal used a higher maintenance factor (about 1.10 and 1.26 in the presentation) because that system uses a higher per‑mile maintenance allowance. On replacements, Erickson said seven non‑public buses are currently eligible for replacement; the PVA replacement‑buses line item shown in the proposal totaled $156,955.68; the total net difference between the baseline and the full proposal was presented as $246,530, with roughly $156,956 attributable to replacement vehicles.

Discussion focused on options to defer replacement buses to lower near‑term spending and on operational efficiencies by coordinating with the Board of Education, including potential transfer points and ride‑sharing between systems if pay, training and insurance standards are aligned. Erickson said the county and Board of Education will continue subgroup talks and report back; he identified March 16 for further meetings of that subgroup.

No formal contract changes were adopted at the March 8 session. Commissioners asked staff to return with costed scenarios showing the savings from specific deferral options and the operational impact of aligning pay and maintenance factors with the Board of Education.","Public works staff explained baseline and proposed non‑public school bus contractor rates, driver tiers and an operational maintenance factor; seven buses are currently eligible for replacement and deferral reduces near‑term costs but increases future obligations.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

St. Mary's County projects $2.4 million FY2011 shortfall; staff proposes $1M stabilization, $500K emergency reserve

Commissioners ask staff for fee‑impact estimates for solid‑waste and STS fares to help close budget gap

County reviews non‑public school bus contract baseline, proposed rate increases and deferred vehicle replacements