Miscellaneous
On the latest episode of the Conduit Street Podcast, Kevin Kinnally and Michael Sanderson discuss the latest news and notes on the Kirwan Blueprint legislation - which received its public hearing on February 17, and in the last several days has sprung to life, with House action appearing imminent.The House’s two committees with joint jurisdiction of the bill – Appropriations and Ways & Means – reviewed a set of “leadership” amendments culled from many submitted by stakeholders, and now appear ready to advance the bill.What's In?Among a lengthy list of bill amendments are two items that affect county funding, in both cases seeking to limit the funding obligation left for county governments to absorb through the multi-year phase-in of the plan.The “Relief” table distributed to House members earlier this week is shown below – encompassing the series of amendments that alter the required county contributions under the bill.What's Out?No “County Phase-In” After AllWhen the Kirwan Commission’s subordinate Funding Formula Workgroup met over the summer and fall, it considered most of the fiscal details embedded in the final legislation. At their final meeting, where the body rendered its decisions, that Workgroup accepted and approved a motion “that the local share be phased in,” and then (after a five-year timetable had been suggested) decided to “articulate that [the local mandate] should be phased, but let that play out.” The motion was then re-stated as “the ramp-up of the local contribution should be phased…we could leave the phase-in of the local share to be determined.” This motion was approved by the body.However, the bill is moving forward without a "county phase-in."In-Budget/Off-Budget School FundingAnother item decided during the October 15 Workgroup decision meeting was to ensure that counties could count dollars toward their required school obligation regardless of the source or means by which they provide them. The essential issue here is that counties are inconsistent with offering certain services within the school budget – school nurses and resource officers are the most often-offered examples, where the county may fund those services through the County Health Department or Sheriff/Police, rather than in the school budget per se.Until this over-arching funding obligation takes hold, that difference is immaterial – but without including those costs, counties providing such “in-kind” funds would be at a funding disadvantage.MACo has made the podcast available through both iTunes and Google Play Music by searching Conduit Street Podcast. You can also listen on our Conduit Street blog with a recap and link to the podcast.You can listen to previous episodes of the Conduit Street Podcast on our website.Useful LinksPrevious Conduit Street Coverage: Tracking the Kirwan Blueprint? Here’s The LatestPrevious Conduit Street Coverage: Evolving House Blueprint Bill – Some County