Pebble Mine - on PBS Frontline last night (Fairbanks, Ketchikan: 2013, home)

[bortstc37]

From the Lake and Pen Borough website: "
The Borough levies three local taxes: a 2% Raw Fish Sales and Use Tax, a 6% Hotel / Motel Room Tax, and a severance tax on the harvest of certain natural resources within the Borough. In addition, the Borough requires anyone who conducts guided activites within its boundaries to purchase a guiding permit based on the number of visitors or clients. The Borough Assembly has adopted conservative budgeting practices including the "forward funding" method, which precludes it from adopting a general fund budget that is more than the general fund balance of the previous year-end."


http://www.lakeandpen.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={E4E1AF70-DAB9-4462-942A-C4B21F8A2D31}

[Naturen]

Originally Posted by Dakster

That is the definition of Corporation.

Let me refine my statement: at All costs.

[jdhpa]

Originally Posted by bortstc37

The Borough Assembly has adopted conservative budgeting practices including the "forward funding" method, which precludes it from adopting a general fund budget that is more than the general fund balance of the previous year-end

That's a good idea. I would like to see governments at all level cap their expenditures for the current year at no more than the revenue they received the previous year.

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by jdhpa

That's a good idea. I would like to see governments at all level cap their expenditures for the current year at no more than the revenue they received the previous year.

Agree with you.

[Dakster]

Sounds great in theory, but in practice maybe not. That could work for certain areas, but not all areas of government. You need to have an emergency fund - to cover a potential unexpected, but highly needed expense. For example, Natural Disasters (Earthquakes, Fires, Floods, Hurricanes, Heavy Snow Fall, Avalanches, mudslids, etc..) and in my local area we have a problem with bursting sewer pipes and a bridge that needs repair urgently. Those things cannot wait to be budgeted in. And sometimes the bill comes with a sticker shock!

As long as the budget includes the rainy day fund - I agree. And I do agree in frugal and wise spending within a budget.

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by Dakster

Sounds great in theory, but in practice maybe not. That could work for certain areas, but not all areas of government. You need to have an emergency fund - to cover a potential unexpected, but highly needed expense. For example, Natural Disasters (Earthquakes, Fires, Floods, Hurricanes, Heavy Snow Fall, Avalanches, mudslids, etc..) and in my local area we have a problem with bursting sewer pipes and a bridge that needs repair urgently. Those things cannot wait to be budgeted in. And sometimes the bill comes with a sticker shock!

As long as the budget includes the rainy day fund - I agree. And I do agree in frugal and wise spending within a budget.

I don't disagree with your idea. The problem is that the borough assemblies and mayors never put money away for an emergency. Any revenue collected from property tax and the rest go into general funds, and later spent.

[Dakster]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

I don't disagree with your idea. The problem is that the borough assemblies and mayors never put money away for an emergency. Any revenue collected from property tax and the rest go into general funds, and later spent.

There should be a rule/law regarding this. I know that when they look at financial stability of a Municipal Government (County/Borough or City) they look at the reserve find levels in comparison to the overall budget.

There is gnerally a balancd budget rule on the books (at least there is here) which means you can't budget more money than you have. Maybe it should be, you can't budget more than 95% of what you have. The 5% has to go into a reserve fund that requires special permission or circumstances to use. I know that in a natural disaster, typically FEMA steps in a reimburses the local entity -- but sometimes these fiscal, unexpected emergencies, are not reimbursed.

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by Dakster

Sounds great in theory, but in practice maybe not. That could work for certain areas, but not all areas of government. You need to have an emergency fund - to cover a potential unexpected, but highly needed expense. For example, Natural Disasters (Earthquakes, Fires, Floods, Hurricanes, Heavy Snow Fall, Avalanches, mudslids, etc..) and in my local area we have a problem with bursting sewer pipes and a bridge that needs repair urgently. Those things cannot wait to be budgeted in. And sometimes the bill comes with a sticker shock!

As long as the budget includes the rainy day fund - I agree. And I do agree in frugal and wise spending within a budget.

Alaska is in a rather unique situation. Since oil royalties pay for 87% of the State's total budget, they could set up some kind of budgetary trust fund. Similar to the existing Permanent Fund, but slated solely for legislative budgets. The dividends from the investments from this fund could be used to continue funding the State into the future, even when the oil runs out. As the fund grows, so would the dividends, and therefore the State's budget. However, it would also require some foresight by our legislators, and I do not see that happening. They are too focused on the "now" and how they can spend every last penny of revenue collected.

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by Dakster

There should be a rule/law regarding this. I know that when they look at financial stability of a Municipal Government (County/Borough or City) they look at the reserve find levels in comparison to the overall budget.

There is gnerally a balancd budget rule on the books (at least there is here) which means you can't budget more money than you have. Maybe it should be, you can't budget more than 95% of what you have. The 5% has to go into a reserve fund that requires special permission or circumstances to use. I know that in a natural disaster, typically FEMA steps in a reimburses the local entity -- but sometimes these fiscal, unexpected emergencies, are not reimbursed.

There is a law, at least at the State level. All 50 States have laws that prohibit enacting a budget that is not balanced. Alaska also has a budgetary reserve fund, but that seems to get tapped regularly for numerous reasons, not all of them emergencies.

[Dakster]

Thanks Glitch. I wasn't sure whether the balanced budget law was in all 50 states. To be honest, I never really cared enough to research it thoroughly.

The PFD i'reserve' fund idea sounds like a great idea. AK currently has a unique situation, that as you pointed out, will not last forever. It is possible, however, to make the benefit of oil royalities last forever. Sorta like what one should setup with a 401K. You want to have an income, but never should touch the principle. The problem is that politicians do not get votes be saving money and not spending it on 'voters'. It will take a special politician to do that - or a lame duck one that cares.