Scraps From The King’s Table

By Delegate Mike McDermott

It has long been said, “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander”…unless, of course, the gander is Baltimore City. For decades on end, Baltimore has always been the favorite son at the table of the king, and, when times were good, it was something to be ignored. Today, times are not so good.

The current budget crisis has stressed local revenues for municipal and county governments to the breaking point. A good portion of that stress is the loss of their share of Maryland’s Highway User Funds. Beginning two years ago, the normal raids on Maryland’s, so called, “Trust Funds” dipped further than ever before to cover the gaping holes in the O’Malley budget. At that time, and ever since, 90% of all Highway User Revenues historically returned to local government in all of the realm never left the castle, with the noticeable exception of Baltimore City. While the rest of Maryland tax payers were figuring out where to come up with local money to patch potholes, while still paying an extremely high gas tax, Baltimore City continued to pave their streets with gold. They were able to do what the rest of Maryland could not because they retained 87% of their portion of the Highway User Funds. Hardly fair or equitable, but since when does that figure into Maryland budget deliberations?

Last week, another Baltimore diversion was uncovered in the formula utilized in divvying up the local portion of the slots proceeds. It seems the new casino at Ocean Downs had a good month and the County Commissioners, Berlin, Ocean Pines, and Ocean City were thinking about their amount of the take. After doing the math, the state provided them their figures which were significantly lower that each had expected. That’s when it was revealed that a provision in the bill signed to create the slots carried a sweetheart deal for Baltimore City to the tune of 18% off the top. This is the same Baltimore City that rejected the notion of a casino in their backyard, while demanding that rural Marylanders take one in their front yards. The 18% cut, which apparently missed the eyes of our local delegations and elected officials, is the cost of passing legislation when large numbers of votes are on the table being moved about like pawns in a game of Chess. They do nothing, provide no service, suffer no infrastructure strains, and yet they get a bigger cut than our own local governments who bear the load.

I hear a lot of talk in Annapolis about how we are “One Maryland”. This is supposed to translate into voting for taxes, fees, regulations, and legislation that may be good for certain jurisdictions, but not necessarily for the one you actually represent in the House. The “One Maryland” concept is predominately trumpeted by the metropolitan districts for, when they write a check, it usually involves many zeros that winds up being paid for by all Marylanders.

It is quite clear that formulas for Education Funds favor Baltimore City as well. For instance, Worcester County receives $2770.00 per pupil from the Maryland Board of Education per year, while Baltimore City pupils receive $10,655.00 for the same purpose. How in the world can this disparity be justified? Only through convoluted formulas created for the sole purpose of transferring wealth from one group of citizens to another. Ironically, no matter the funds that are sent in to aid the city, the results are dismal. In fact, we merely hear the cry of “more, more”.

The recent legislation attempting to lower the boom on rural Maryland is the ban on septic systems as we know them. I have named the governor’s proposal his “No Crapper Left Behind” initiative. By now, most of us know of the attempt to supplant local development codes with strict state restrictions that would all but shut down any significant development in rural Maryland. It has been proffered, once again, by representatives and a State Secretary of Planning who did not reach out to rural Maryland for comments or concerns. Though they held up several jurisdictions on the shore as prime examples of how development should be managed, the crowd on the stage did not include any representation from those jurisdictions. I find this quite typical whenever there is an effort to expand centralized government in Maryland.

For the most part, the attack on rural Maryland revolves around control. The best delivery system for government is that which is local, accessible, and quickly responsive to the taxpayer. Consolidating power in one place can often lead to a “one size fits all” approach to law and planning. It further enhances the chance that those who control who sits at the table also decide who eats, and how much. We have seen it with Education, we’ve seen it with slots, we’ve seen it with “Trust Funds”, we’ve seen it with development, and we’ve seen it with general tax dollars. In rural Maryland, we’ve seen enough.