Council seeks clarity after Park & Planning requests $2.4M from Water Quality Protection Fund

During the Transportation and Environment Committee’s April 20 session, council members pressed staff for clear numbers showing how a Park and Planning request for $2.4 million from the Water Quality Protection Fund would affect rates, other funds and resident bills.

Mr. Levchenko explained that the Water Quality Protection Fund is an enterprise fund that stands on its own and that the executive’s recommendation would raise the water quality protection charge by $10.50 under the current assumptions. He noted Park and Planning asked for a larger reallocation of work into the fund: "Park and Planning requested an increase of 2,400,000. The executive recommended increase of 309,000," he said, and acknowledged the delta was about $2.1 million.

Council Vice President Balcom and other members asked whether shifting $2.1 million into the Water Quality Protection Fund would merely swap funding sources (reducing an administrative fund allocation) or whether it would expand the overall spending capacity for Park and Planning. Richard Harris, Office of Management and Budget, said the difference would not necessarily trigger program cuts because some activities Park and Planning wanted funded by the Water Quality Protection Fund are currently paid from the administrative fund; "not getting the $2,100,000 doesn't result in program cuts or position cuts, because the activities ... are currently funded by the admin fund tax," he said.

Why it matters: staff warned the full budgetary impact depends on whether Park and Planning would replace administrative‑funded activities with water‑funded ones, which in turn could change the appearance of rates on the tax bill. Council members asked staff to provide a table showing the funding sources, the $2.4M/ $308K figures, and the net resident impact so the committee and the Planning, Housing and Parks Committee can evaluate a multi‑year approach.

What’s next: staff said DEP, OMB and Park and Planning would return with a multi‑year plan and a clearer breakdown of how the MOU with Park and Planning specifies eligible work and which activities would shift funding sources. The committee postponed taking a final position on any additional increase to the Water Quality Protection Fund charge until it receives that analysis.

Ending: For now the executive’s recommendation stands as the baseline; committee members requested more precise figures and a resident‑impact table before endorsing any reallocation of the $2.1 million delta.