Officials: More cuts will sting
Meg Alexander — Staff WriterFAIRMONT - When times are tight, the only thing to do is tighten your belt, pull yourself up by your boot straps, make due with what you have ... right?
But agencies and municipalities are growing tired of feeling the pinch as leaders at the State Capitol look to them to fill the projected $1 billion deficit for 2010-11.
Gov. Tim Pawlenty's plan to slash spending includes $347 million from health and human services; $250 million in local government aid; and a 2.5 percent reduction in the state's rate for long-term care.
Announced last month, the proposal is disheartening to those already hurting from previous cutbacks.
HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Grants for child support, children and community services, mental health, family investment, supportive work ... the list is long and daunting, as Warren Knutson reads off the programs at Faribault and Martin County Human Services facing funding cuts.
"It's a big concern," said Knutson, executive director. "Because if we would get a change or reduction in the mandates or in the timeframes we have to react on some of these situations, that's one thing. But if the requirements stay the same, where do you find the resources to keep up your efforts?"
And it's not like there's a lot of fat to trim. The agency already is struggling after facing major cuts in 2003.
"We've been dealing with economizing and consolidating and streamlining ever since then, so it's not like this hasn't been a year-to-year issue we've been continually concerned with," Knutson said.
Meanwhile, as funding decreases, needs are up.
"The business that we have here is counter-cyclical," Knutson said. "When times are bad, some people lay off people because they have less business. Well, we have more business and our case loads generally increase. With more business and fewer resources to meet those needs, it's a challenge."
CONTINUING CARE SERVICES
"We've all heard, 'Do more with less,' but there comes a point when there's no more that can be done and there's no more to take away from us," said Bob Lake, director of Lakeview Health Services in Fairmont.
Lake isn't impressed with any budget plans on the table right now, since all look toward long-term care to solve part of the state's budget problems.
"My frustration is that we're not really part of the problem in the state of Minnesota and yet they're tapping us to take money away," Lake said. "And that is at a time when Minnesota is not considered a good payer."
According to Lake, Minnesota is the seventh-worst payer in the nation, with the difference in the cost of providing long-term care and the rate of reimbursement averaging $20 to 24 per person, per day.
"I see that here at my campus," Lake said. "Our foundation helps us support our mission by helping us cover that spread in uncovered reimbursements. In other words, we're providing the care but we're not getting paid for it."
Lake already was worried about finances as his expenses increase, since reimbursements were frozen two years ago and will remain that way for another three years.
"I have only one place I can go to take money away, and that's from my staffing," he said. "And our staffing levels in the last 10 years have fallen as a result of the inadequate reimbursement rates.
"I see a negative trend, if our staffing rates continue to get lower and lower. That does not equal quality care - not in my book."
Falling under the same knife are agencies like STEP, which provide services to people with physical and cognitive disabilities.
"We've already done quite a bit of cutting in our own agency," said Sue Eisenmenger, executive director. "We're bare bones. Another 2.5 percent (cut) would have quite an impact."
"We're talking about not being able to provide services to people with disabilities, not the way we have been."
Eisenmenger sees this as a step in the wrong direction, when Minnesota had previously prided itself on its efforts to take people out of institutions and help them become active members of their communities.
"I think the cuts are going to put some of that at jeopardy," she said. "They may be out of state institutions but they still will not be part of their community."
When rates were cut last year, most agencies like her own tried to cut administrative costs and reduce expenses like out-of-town travel, she said.
"Now we're talking about reducing staff hours. ... We provide a lot of jobs for people in our communities. This could have quite an economic impact, especially in smaller towns and rural areas."
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID
Jim Zarling had been in this position before. Fairmont's city administrator wasn't happy but he also wasn't surprised when Fairmont's state aid was cut last year. The $530,000 hurt, but it wasn't impossible to handle - on a short-term basis.
"We eliminated $650,000 in expenditures," said Zarling, referring to a freeze the City Council imposed on most capital improvements. "We scaled way back in planning for 2010. We can do for a period of time, but then you're just compounding the problem in future years."
Then came the news that Pawlenty plans to cut another $580,000 from Fairmont's funds.
"It's a little scary," Zarling admitted. "... It's going to be a struggle for us to figure out how to deal with this one."
Adding to the uncertainty of the situation are clashing timetables for the city and Legislature.
"Unfortunately, probably before they all make up their mind ... we'll be halfway through our budgeting," Zarling said. "It seems like we are always in this position because we're easy to take money away from. We seem to take more than our share of the burden."
"But we'll have to wait and see. We'll get through this one too."
|
oldsarge
|
|
|---|---|
|
03-14-10 12:57 PM
|
Reality check It Seems someones watching the extreamist network (fox) If you realy want to do what your talking about then why stop where you are? In your view then any aggriculture assistance aid has to go (seccceed or fail in your view) no small or lardge buisness aid, no more vets benifits ( something else you'd have to classify as socialist welfare in your view) No more help for the elder;y or handycap (again more of in your own view has to be listed as socialist welfare). Why stop there? you know that little thing called the homestead act? best stop that too. Shall I go on?
|
|
concernedhuman2
|
|
|
03-13-10 11:12 AM
|
The idea of rich tends to lean towards those that can boast 200000 or more per year the taxes on this amount should surpase my 45000 but dollar to dollar does not....
|
|
SoupPotts
|
|
|
03-12-10 5:42 PM
|
An idea that is being considered in the MN House is the repeal of rate equalization for nursing homes. As it is now, the State of MN determines how much each nursing home can charge for its services. I would support this change that would allow nursing home operators to determine how much to charge its customers for the type and level of care being delivered. The State of MN can maintain its control of the Medicaid funds. Bob Lake is right. MN is the 7th worst payor in the nation right now. I think most Minnesotans agree to pay when they have the ability and resources and to pay their fair share of the service received. And if their assets are depleted, they apply for medical assistance.
|
|
sissetonsailor
|
|
|
03-12-10 2:14 PM
|
Concerned - I have no problem giving some of my earnings towards those that need it. I do that through taxes, charitable giving, and volunteering. My point is the current system is broken. First, define what a "rich person" is and what a "poor person" is. Then, why is somebody "poor", if they truly are incapable of supporting themselves, then they need our help. If they are functional and have lost their job, they need our help. Unfortunately many of the "poor" think that you become "rich" overnight. Yes, some people are born into a "rich" family, but for the most part, we all secure our economic security through paying attention to what is going on around us, working/studying hard, taking risks, and god forbid, sacrificing some things and even moving to an area where there is more opportunity.
|
|
blue5011
|
|
|
03-12-10 11:49 AM
|
concernedhuman2, "We are all avoiding the evident and that is the very rich need to be putting back into the community not just griping about programs that economically would make a person viable in 1960." I have worked hard all my life and saved for rainy days. Why are progressive's so intent on stealing what I worked for via the tax code? No one lives forever, including me.
|
|
concernedhuman2
|
|
|
03-12-10 11:10 AM
|
How can waste be measured in Human Services when the meager amounts paid to people barely get them through the month? Programs being cut means children will go without.We are all avoiding the evident and that is the very rich need to be putting back into the community not just griping about programs that economically would make a person viable in 1960. Increase in taxes are the answer. Quit just being takers and start giving...Even if it is a job to an unemployed or some of your wasted hours as a volunteer. Show you care and are not just another selfish Southern Minnesotan.
|
|
sissetonsailor
|
|
|
03-12-10 10:32 AM
|
The problem with liberal(socialist) policies is that you eventually run out of OTHER people's money. I bet there is a better way to take care of our needy and disadvantaged than our current model. Much of what we spend on entitlements is wasteful, doesn't do a good enough job of containing fraud and abuse, and probably does nothing more than make us feel good about it. The money and decision making should probably not even be at the state level. We can look down the street, see the people in church and our communities, etc that need our help and we, locally could figure it out on a more efficient level. Keep the money and administration more local. Just a theory.
|
|
oldsarge
|
|
|
03-12-10 10:19 AM
|
Yet the city has project after project lined up that we will be paying for. We do need a new water plant, we could use the new channel bridge and it would be nice to build a new school but with all these cuts to the city, why is the city bound and determind to do all these projects at a time, WE CAN NOT AFFORD THEM ALL? I suggest they prioritse them and take them one at a time, not all at once and as we can AFFORD them. A rough estimate of these projects from what the city has put out there. 1) 30 million water treatment (hopefully 15 comes from stimulus), 2) about at least 15 for a school (though I still have yet to hear what demo would cost). 3) though I can not remember the exact amout lets say another 2 million for the bridge. That is 30 to 45 million the city is talking about. Just on those 3 projeccts about normal things like street repair, public safty.
|