Rather than cutting services, the county government, and all other local municipalities, should initiate salary freezes, and benefit contributions; starting with the top paid managers. Also, vacant positions should be left unfilled. County government officials can also do their part by volunteering pay reductions, and the elimination of other perks. There are many things that can be done to stay withing the 2% cap, that would not require a reduction in essential services.

It sounds so logical doesn't it Elizabeth? Phasing out pensions & higher employee contributions to healthcare sounds like a simple solution as well. Nobody loses their job and taxpayers aren't burdened past their means. But these obviously simple ways of cutting the budget will never happen. Either no concessions will be made and things go on like they've been or cuts to the sheriffs dept will lead to overtime at the local police departments therefore ensuring the taxpayer NEVER catches a break.

And all the while, the County should be focusing its efforts on bringing new businesses & new residents into the county to provide the much-needed taxes, but is our Executive showing leadership in this arena? I'd say he gets an "F" in developing growth in the county - and, thus, shrinking the burden on taxpayers. The budget reads more like a temper tantrum than an honest attempt to live within our means in a thoughtful way. It includes doubling the real estate transfer tax, a 19% increase in the mortgage recording tax, slash and burn in the sheriff's budget, a 40% cut in support to our veterans . . . . the travesty goes on and on in every section of the budget. And as taxes continue to rise, people and businesses continue to leave the county, leaving an even smaller tax base. If the Executive were a CEO, the board & stockholders would demand his departure, immediately. These are difficult times and we need creative solutions to our problems - not the same old, worn-out, tired approach. I, for one, would love to see our County Exec really put forth a thoughtful, creative solution with some of the areas previously considered untouchable (salary freezes, benefits, pensions, union-demands) being addressed.

The promises in pensions, health-care and similar costs to public employees must be looked at carefully. I don't know the details, but working for government seems to allow for an earlier pension, and generous benefits that many of us working in the private sector can only dream of. Something and somebody has to give, and the giving should be equally distributed. Just shouting that "my budget is untouchable" is not a solution, the property taxpayers' pockets are not endless, and at some point we, the taxpayers, will just have to say "enough is enough".

The only people who are concerned with "a cut in services" seem to be the service providers themselves and the political professionals. The average citizen would prefer to have a few more bucks in their wallet. I say cut every town department budget 10% and give that money back to the taxpayers. The sky will not fall if the police departments cut their budgets 10%. The average citizen is more concerned with their current and future standard of living than with an unlikely crime wave.

How About One..Uno.police force...oopps too simple...what we have in comparison is like the bronx having 7 police forces and the bronx still have way more population..this is a sleepy small populated suburb folks.we have the State Police...the Palisades parkway police..the Sheriffs Department then add ALL the other cop police department and we need this??it ALL FALLS BACK ON THE TAXPAYERS..higher taxes equates to less affordability to young people being able to afford homes.add the THE SUPER CRAZY STRICT REQUIREMENTS OF OBATAINING A MORTGAGE.= VERY FEW HOME SALES." THE NEW 7 TO 10 YEAR REALITY".subraCt the PARK LANDS..ALL OVER ROCKLAND.AND WE DONT HAVE THE MOST DENSELY POPULATED AREA.YET EVEN A GUY FROZE TO DEATH OUTSIDE THE MALL...MAYBE WE NEED NEW EYE EXAMS LOL.. but "LESS IS MORE..a lot of TOWNS AND CITES in this country are on the BRINK of INSOLVENCY"ROCKLAND DOWN THE ROAD?

What does BCI stand for?

There are plenty of places that the County can cut cost in addition to the Sheriffs Department. How about the Rockland County Department of Transportation and Transport of Rockland? C'mon man, take a look at the books on that black hole of taxpayers money. Rockland County taxpayers subsidizing a bus company is ridiculous. Running 3/4 empty buses at all hours is not worth the expense and if it is, let the private sector do it.
Regarding the Sheriff's Department, what is "BCI" that is referred to numerous times in the piece beside Budget Cuts Impact? I guess it must be some kind of evidence collection unit but if each town maintains their own, then why have it? Any Officer that collects evidence will need to appear in court to testify, which turns into another expense for the Sheriff's Department.
All these Chiefs are doing the right thing to speak out against cuts to another LE agency. However the complaints are disingenuous and self serving because they now need to shoulder the burden. The bottom line is they are paid to be managers so they better start doing more with less and justifying their existence or their jobs will be eliminated in favor of one Rockland County Police force. Having 5+ separate Chiefs plus a Sheriff in an area the size of Rockland County is something that also needs some serious cost analysis. Are you listening C. Scott?

The cost of aw enforcement in Rockland is out of control. Clarkstown PD gets 81 days off every year. Saaries average $160,000 a year. DISGRACE.