It's Now Time For One Human-Services Levy

The Nov. 6 election again exposed the irrationality of Ohio's propensity to
proliferate money issues on the ballot.

Is there a more implausible notion in American democracy than thinking that
complex financial issues can be reduced to a simple "yes" or "no" vote on a
levy? Among the many issues on the ballot to confound voters were levies
for three of the major human-services agencies in Lucas County.

Predictably, voters approved the levies for the Lucas County Mental
Retardation and Developmental Disabilities (MRDD) and Children Services
boards. These are an easy sell. Ads depicting children in wheelchairs with
developmental disabilities or in need of adoption tug at heartstrings.

Not so with alcoholics and drug addicts. It may be short-sighted in terms
of the damage done to families and to society, but voters are not
sympathetic toward those who are chemically dependent, some of whom turn to
criminal activity. So the levy for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Services (ADAS)
was defeated, although by a smaller margin.

Did voters have the information necessary to make an informed decision? How
much time did the average voter spend to study the MRDD 3-mill permanent
levy, which will produce about $30 million a year?

Did voters ask "Why 3 mills instead of 2 mills or 4 mills?" What does a
voter do if persuaded after careful study that 3 mills are excessive, but 2
mills are critically needed? Would results have been so lopsided had the
average voter realized that MRDD has had more money than it could spend
through the 1990s?

In 1996, MRDD had total expenditures of $37.2 million. On Dec. 31, 1996, it
had a fund balance of $16.2 million that it rolled into the next fiscal
year. No financial expert would lavish so much money on an agency that
couldn't even come close to spending it all. Yet the Lucas County voters
did. MRDD reduced its end-of-the-year fund balances as the 2001 election
neared, so that by Dec. 31, 2000, its fund balance was about $8.4 million.

In fairness to MRDD, experts say it is regarded as a well-run agency.

The situation with Children Services is even more interesting. This agency
was lauded for asking voters to replace an expiring 2.25-mill levy with a
1.4-mill, five-year levy. As The Blade editorialized, "Here's an agency
that wants voters to approve a reduction in taxes." Asking for a smaller
levy was an astute campaign tactic. The agency could argue good management
- - a plus with voters. Just in case voters might question the need for even
the 1.4 mills, the agency let it be known that voter disapproval of the
levy would throw Children Services into a $4 million deficit next year.

Children Services neglected to mention that it asked for a smaller levy
because it was rolling in money and would have no trouble covering the $4
million deficit. A fund balance at the end of 1998 of more than $12 million
jumped to $27.4 million by the end of 2000. For an agency that had total
revenues of $37.9 million in 2000, this is a sizeable fund balance.

Assuming the same level of revenues for this year as last, it will have
nearly $38 million in revenues plus the $27.4 million that it carried into
the year, or $65.4 million to do less than $38 million worth of work. No
wonder the agency sought a smaller levy.

In the meantime, ADAS has been limping along with no levy of its own and
penurious funding from other sources. In fact, last summer, ADAS learned
that state funding would decrease, making a local levy even more important.
ADAS has had no success with levies.

Yet need remains high. The current ADAS "Community Plan for the Provision
of Alcohol and Other Drug Services" has long waiting lists for treatment
services and prevention programs.

According to a 1998 University of Toledo study, per capita spending on
alcohol and drug abuse services in Lucas County in 1995 ($10.49) was well
below Summit County ($21.95), Franklin County ($19.78), and Cuyahoga County
($14.08). In fact, per capita spending was less in Lucas than in any of the
six most populous Ohio counties.

Human-services professionals knew the ADAS levy would be a hard sell. After
all, an ADAS levy lost by a 60 percent to 40 percent margin in March, 2000.
This time it came close - 47,164 votes for the levy and 48,279 votes
against, according to unofficial returns. Yet the record remains: no Ohio
county ADAS board has passed a levy.

So there we have it. Three human-services agencies in Lucas County find
themselves in an electoral system where the incentives for two of them are
to go it alone. Voters routinely approve levies for the two agencies that
have adequate money and deny levies to the agency most in need.

Lucas County commissioners, who must approve levy issues for the ballot but
otherwise have surprisingly little control over the human-services
agencies, must wonder about a better way. Can we not structure the
situation so that county commissioners exercise the direction and control
over county agencies? Can we not find a way to empower them with the
authority and responsibility to insure a more rational allocation of
funding among county agencies?

There is a better way. It's called an "umbrella" levy, one system for all
county human-services agencies.

The Ohio General Assembly paved the way for the umbrella levy in 1991, when
it eliminated the requirement that a levy must relate to a single purpose,
saying that levies instead could make appropriations for one or more of the
following purposes: public assistance, human or social services, relief,
welfare, hospitalization, health, and support of general or tuberculosis
hospitals for a period of 10 years. Most other levies have a maximum of
five years. Obviously, this section allows for funding a multitude of
services under a single human-services umbrella levy.

An umbrella levy for Lucas County would put the county commissioners where
they belong: in charge. The proceeds from the umbrella levy (or levies)
would be allocated by commissioners, who would have the incentive and
authority to subject each board's operations to greater scrutiny and
oversight. It should be their job to sort out the financial issues and
insure that some agencies don't get too much money while others get none
from levies. Adequate budget and analytical staff would be available to
insure that the allocation of levy funds is reasonably related to
human-services needs in the county.

The umbrella levy would give commissioners the authority necessary to
prevent two human-services agencies from building up huge surpluses while
other human-services agencies remain so starved for funds that they cannot
respond to urgent needs.

Ronald Randall is a professor of political science and public
administration at the University of Toledo. In 1998, he coordinated a
university study that examined funding alternatives for human services in
Lucas County.