The HRFC (Human Resources Finance and Property) Committee refused to consider the HHS resolution to cut the proposed property tax increase by $1,500,000. The resolution was passed unanimously by the HHS committee and was sent to HRFC using the new budget process developed by the HRFC committee and approved by the full Board. The HRFC committee has repeatedly refused to follow the process that they developed.
The motion to consider and adopt the amendment was made by Supervisor Marshall. No other member of the HRFC committee, including Chair Gibbs, would even provide a 2nd to the motion. If another Committee member had been willing to provide a 2nd, the motion would have then been considered and voted on by the HRFC committee. Typically the chair of a specific Board or Committee, in this case Supervisor Robinson, does not make or 2nd motions.
The effort to introduce the amendment resolution followed the Board’s normal procedure to consider ideas and motions at the Standing Committee of Jurisdiction (the standing committee that has responsibility for the topic under consideration), which then typically either reject or forward the resulting resolution to either the full Board or the HRFC for further consideration. In this specific case, the proposal, HHS motion, and resolution all followed the specific newly introduced budget process that was developed by the HRFC committee and approved by the Board. By refusing to provide a 2nd for the motion, the HRFC committee members deliberately chose not to follow the very process that they developed.
One of the goals for developing the new budget process was to provide a means that individual Supervisors could present ideas earlier in the process in an attempt to shorten the length of the County’s annual budget meeting. Because the HRFC refused to follow their own process, I am providing background for my proposed amendment resolutions in future blogs on this website and plan to introduce 2 Resolutions to amend the Budget at the November 9th Committee meeting.