Bob Hackworth for Pinellas

Pinellas County needs a vibrant leader who will challenge the status quo on the County Commission. Bob has a plan that starts and ends with bold strong leadership.

LEADERSHIP THAT

• RESTORES THE PUBLIC’S TRUST


• TACKLES HEAD-ON THE PROVINCIAL AND POLITICAL OBSTACLES THAT CURRENTLY BLOCK GREATER COLLABORATION WITH OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS


• PURSUES MORE STABLE AND DIVERSE SOURCES OF REVENUE TO FUND ESSENTIAL SERVICES


• MAXIMIZES EFFICIENCIES AND STRETCHES SHRINKING RESOURCES


• CREATES A NEW MODEL FOR THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE THAT IS BOTH MORE EFFICIENT AND MORE AFFORDABLE FOR TAXPAYERS


• KEEPS COUNTY PARKS FREE, OPEN, AND PROPERLY MAINTAINED


• MAKES A COUNTYWIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM A REALITY


• PROMOTES TRANSIT PROJECTS ESSENTIAL TO OUR ECONOMIC AND LIFESTYLE FUTURE IN PINELLAS


• PLANS AHEAD TO SEEK A REASONABLE SOLUTION FOR KEEPING MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL IN PINELLAS COUNTY

Bob’s Agenda . . .

Voters in District 4 are looking for leadership. They want someone who will tackle head-on the challenge of governing Pinellas County in these difficult economic times. They want someone who will rise above partisanship and parochial interests and work pragmatically to solve the problems we face.

And they want someone they can trust.

Both my record of governing in Dunedin and my demonstrated understanding of what good government is (connected, responsive, accountable, transparent, a vision of the future) speaks to my ability to provide bold strong leadership as a new voice on the Board of County Commissioners.

That bold strong leadership is essential if county government is ever going to overcome the provincial and political obstacles that currently block greater collaboration with other local governments, collaboration that would result in a more efficient delivery of government services without redundancy and at a lower per-unit cost. The walls dividing governmental and other public service providers must come down in these tough times if we are to maximize efficiencies and stretch our shrinking resources farthest.

Bold strong leadership is needed in the pursuit of more stable and diverse sources of revenue to fund essential services without regard to the boom-and-bust economic cycle. The current primary reliance on property tax revenues in the General Fund, a revenue source neither stable nor equitable, must be addressed and changed.

I have political experience, a record on public issues, and a resume of public service and community leadership to offer the voters of District 4. I’m campaigning as well on a pledge to restore trust and confidence in local government, something I believe is of the highest importance. Elected officials, in order to both govern effectively and provide bold leadership, must have credibility and be free of even the perception of special-interest influence. That’s why I’ve taken a principled self-imposed campaign-finance reform stand by limiting campaign contributions to no more than $100, from individuals only, and pledged to not accept a single dime from lobbyists, PACs, developers, or special interests with business before the County Commission.

Pinellas County is facing a budget shortfall of more than $70 million over the next two years. What should be done to close that gap?

The proposed FY 2011 budget includes a 15% proportional reduction to departments under the BOCC as well as various cuts to the budgets of Constitutional Officer agencies that balance the current $60 million shortfall. I have concerns about the fiscal responsibility of some of the cuts made to public safety and health and human services, as they may be short-term solutions that result in higher long-term costs. But given the tools that the BOCC had to work with, which did not include much consolidation, collaboration, or tapping of new revenue sources, overall I find the current proposed budget and balancing strategies are prudent and acceptable.

The question I have is why did they not explore in greater depth those new tools. That was not responsible. The current primary reliance on property tax revenues in the General Fund seems to ignore other contemporary financial strategies that are more equitable and stable and that must be considered given the new budget realities facing local governments.

Going forward, if I’m elected, I’ll push for a better job of managing optimum efficiencies and identifying new revenue sources other than property tax receipts to fund essential general fund services. New revenue sources, that offset ad valorem taxes and that are more fair, equitable and stable, need to be urgently explored and considered. Examples that are working in other places are: special fire assessments, a tourist food and beverage tax, local-option gas tax, local business tax, payments-in-lieu-of taxes, stormwater fees, solid-waste franchise fees and others that are more equitable and stable.

Finally, improving communication with county residents about the service levels they expect and what it takes to meet those expectations is a primary job of elected leaders. Making the complexity of the budgeting process understandable and presenting citizens with evidence of government effectiveness and efficiency has to be better emphasized. Having and maintaining credibility and the public’s trust is vital to effective governance, especially so when trying to make structural changes.

Consolidation is often mentioned as a way to reduce the cost of government. What could be consolidated in Pinellas to reduce the cost of county government?

Consolidation/collaborations with other local governments must be pursued. Strong bold leadership from the Commission will be required to overcome the provincial and political obstacles that have blocked that effort in the past. Even with a weak County Charter, I believe it is possible for a unified Commission to leverage partnership agreements with cities and other taxing districts that create greater efficiencies and eliminate redundancies. Almost any service currently offered should be a candidate for consolidation: public works, fleet management, sign shops, transit, traffic control, parks, library services, Fire/EMS, Sheriff/city police, and others.

What is new today is not necessarily the strategies that are available, but the urgency to get something done. I support the consolidation of the 19 fire departments into a system of regional service areas. It would maximize efficiencies while maintaining a high quality level of service at a lower per-capita cost to taxpayers.

The high cost of the countywide, dual-response Emergency Medical Service has led to intense debate about whether a less expensive system could be substituted to save money. Do you support instituting a less costly EMS system?

The current dual-response service should be replaced with a high quality alternative that is more efficient and more affordable for taxpayers. It bothers me greatly when the reason given for finally exploring changing the current system is declining property tax revenues. This has been an inefficient system for 20 years fueled by increasing property tax revenues that came from swelling property values that were not offset by rolled back EMS tax rates. The subsidized inefficiencies of the model were allowed to happen and have become institutionalized.

Maximizing efficiencies and stretching resources should always be the standard practice of a government-run and taxpayer funded public safety service.

Strong bold leadership from the Commission is now required to achieve a long overdue overhaul of the current model.

The county was proposing to close parks two days a week and charge $3 to $5 for admission to some of the largest parks. What should be done to keep parks open and free to enter? Do we need park rangers or meter maids?

I do not support the proposals. I feel strongly that a high quality, free-admission urban park system should continue to be a part of the social fabric of our community. I think it is the wrong policy in reaction to a temporary economic downturn and past failures to address structural solutions. As stated previously, with savings from a more efficient delivery of an array of consolidated services combined with new revenue sources, we can keep a great park system open and free to enter.

I would support generating limited alternative revenue sources from the park system such as commercial leasebacks and monetizing assets given the protections guaranteed under the Pinellas charter amendment governing environmental lands.

For FY 2011, I would not make the proposed $1.1M capital outlay for entrance-fee collection infrastructure until it is absolutely certain that there is no other sustainable option for maintaining a high quality, free admission park system for future generations. Instead, a short-term strategy of using that $1.1M plus approximately $1M of excess reserves in order to weather the economic crisis would work while the effort to identify new revenue sources for FY 2012 and beyond is made. The new revenues should be adequate to not only meet the current minimum budget allocation but also to reverse previous drastic cuts and their degrading effects.

Just a few years ago, Pinellas County government added some city-style services such as access to library services and recreation programs, declaring that residents of the unincorporated area wanted those services. But now, falling revenues have led the county to back off those initiatives, cancel programs and cut hundreds of positions. Given these new economic realities, what should be the role of county government in the future?

Updated and solid public opinion research is needed now to gauge the priorities of unincorporated community residents. They should be asked to rank, in order, their priority municipal services, (parks, sheriff, road maintenance, fire, code enforcement, library services, rec programs) and address their willingness to pay for them. As I mentioned before, the walls dividing governmental and other public service providers must come down in these tough times in order to maximize efficiencies and stretch shrinking resources farthest. Within District 4 especially, I believe stronger city-county partnerships with broader shared use of private sports leagues and Y’s may be the best way to leverage collective parks and recreation resources. I would advocate the same approach in the area of providing access to library services; greater collaboration between the city and special district libraries is needed to stretch resources farthest.

What do you think of County Administrator Bob LaSala? What should his job be?

I think Mr. LaSala has done a very good job in the face of the shrinking revenue stream caused by mandated revenue caps, falling property values and the economic meltdown. He seemed to understand the complexity of what he would have to deal with when he took the job and overall has performed well.

That said, I don’t think his role should be that of the bold strong leader I speak of. It seems to me he is often either asked by his Commission or by default left to play that leadership role on big issues. He is trotted out only to find the rug pulled out from underneath him.

My observation is that he can be the solid administrator needed to implement structural change if directed and supported by his bosses. He is up to the challenge of seeking maximum efficiencies, consolidation, and stretching shrinking resources. To be totally successful, he can’t be asked to deal with the politics of the change he is directed to bring about. His focus should be on objective analysis, objective recommendations, and successful implementation of the policy decisions made by the Board.

Do you support or oppose Pinellas’ pursuit of a light rail line to connect Tampa with St. Petersburg and Clearwater? Do you support or oppose the idea of raising the local option sales tax to pay for rail?

I support, will campaign for, and advocate for mass transit projects as essential to our economic and lifestyle future in Pinellas County. It should be a part of a regional effort and a local option sales tax is the best option for funding and attracting federal and state grants.

The process of planning, financing, lobbying, educating, designing, building and operating a system of this magnitude will take many years. Leadership, accountability, quality control and patience will be crucial. Without mass transit, Tampa Bay businesses and our economy may face slow death.

This issue (getting a local option sales tax passed) will require strong bold leadership unafraid of the short-term political implications caused by current difficult economic times.

Do you support or oppose the county commission moving forward with a countywide recycling program? Why?

I strongly support the county commission moving forward with a countywide recycling program and will be a strong advocate for the program if elected to the Board.

Somehow curbside recycling got politically reframed as an exorbitant expense in a bad budget year instead of a responsible environmental and economic policy that was already paid for from a dedicated source. Unfortunately, this has resulted in a delay and perhaps another fight to reconfirm it as the responsible public policy for the county.

The leadership and foresight of a previous County Commission, that acted then to build the state-of-the-art Waste-to-Energy plant, should serve as a perfect example of the leadership needed now on the Board to move forward with a state-of-the-art countywide recycling program in Pinellas County.

The delay, however, has given staff additional time to plan an even better program factoring in new state legislation requiring 75% recycling and possible implementation of added pay-as-you-throw programs. When staff has completed its new plan in early 2011, it will be time for the Board to act without further delay.

The Tampa Bay Rays have made it clear that they want a new stadium and will not complete their contract to play at Tropicana Field until 2027. What role, if any, should Pinellas County play in the debate about a stadium, where it should be located and how it should be funded?

Leadership from the Board of County Commissioners should play a role in efforts to retain the team in Pinellas if possible. The team’s huge economic impact to the county and to the region, which has been substantiated, is too big for us to sit by and allow the team to relocate outside the region. In addition, national publicity and the value of Major League baseball as a vehicle for successfully attracting new business to the region has to be considered as meeting the public purpose standard for public funding.

That said, the significance of the existing use agreement between the team and the city of St. Petersburg must be respected and given its due as retention efforts are explored. Ideally a new stadium should be centrally located in mid-Pinellas/St. Petersburg with a light-rail link to Tampa. A long-term public funding model matched by private funding from team owners should be offered as a way to retain the team and the economic impact it brings. The county could even demand an equity position in team ownership if the proportion of public funding needed exceeds the reasonable return-on-investment ratio justified by the economic impact the team continues to bring to the area.

Like transit, this issue will require planning ahead and strong bold leadership unafraid of the short-term political implications caused by current difficult economic times.

 

Donate to Bob's Campaign