County should reconsider proposed forestry cuts

Star News

Editorials

Taylor County has a long history of balancing its budget on the county’s forestry and recreation department. Through logging revenue on the county forest, the department routinely generates income far in excess of its operating costs.

This year, the county is on pace to collect more than $600,000 in logging revenues compared to the approximately $165,000 it costs to run the department. These revenues have allowed the county to keep taxes low while also providing funds for projects such as purchasing property to meet the storage needs of the law enforcement and other county departments. This is a good thing and shows the county forest system is working.

Now it appears the county is wanting to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs claiming that the feed costs are too high. At the Oct. 4 budget review session, three out of the seven finance and personnel committee members voted to cut a position out of the forestry budget.

Just three votes were needed because the action was taken after two of the committee members had been excused to go to other county meetings. The cut is projected to have a budget impact of $100,000 in savings.

As with most things, it is more complicated than that. The county forestry staff manages 17,728 acres of predominately mixed hardwoods forest. The obligation under state law is to maximize the land’s logging revenues. Not having staff there to set up sales will mean less sales put out for bid, which will mean reduced revenues for the county and towns and reduced work for area loggers.

This will also result in reduced amount of assistance given to maintain and upgrade snowmobile, ATV/UTV and other recreational trails in the county as well as working with groups to get state recreational grants. All of these things will have a real impact on Taylor County and the people who pay taxes here.

It was recently announced that Taylor County has received the Wisconsin Forest Productivity Award for an unprecedented fifth consecutive year. This award is given based on the overall profitability per acre of county forests in the state. By any reasonable measure it appears Taylor County has been doing something right for at least the past five years.

This should have the other 14 county board members questioning if short-term cuts are in the long-term best interest of the county or if there are some other reasons the cut is being proposed at this time.

If the full county board feels the need to reduce staff, it should do as board member Scott Mildbrand has suggested and do this through attrition and a thorough review to determine if positions need to be filled as they become vacant.

Seemingly arbitrary cuts, especially those to a revenue- generating department, are disruptive and demoralizing to the entire county staff.

The full county board will have an opportunity to review the proposed budget on October 26. All board members must take the opportunity to question the cuts and proposed policy changes built into the budget and demand that they be discussed and acted on separately rather than just being grouped in a yes or no vote for the overall budget.

Last spring the county revamped its committee structure specifically with the goal to prevent three-person committee majorities from deciding the course of action for the entire county.

At the October 26 board meeting, county supervisors must not be shy in reviewing the actions of the committee and determining what they as the full county board see is the best course for the county as a whole.