As elected officials, my colleagues and I are aware that government procurement decisions must seek to ensure the best use of taxpayer dollars. In this case, Sage has been providing economic analysis and personal income forecasting services to Baltimore County’s spending affordability committee since 2010, and Mr. Basu has been providing discussion facilitation services to the county auditor’s economic advisory committee (which also includes individuals from various elements of the business community) since 2002. For these services, the cost to taxpayers has been very reasonable. In recent years, the cost has totaled approximately $1,600 per quarter or $6,400 annually. Neither service influences the County Council’s “regulatory” responsibilities, as Mr. Plymyer tries to suggest. Rather, our spending affordability committee relies on the data‐driven personal income forecast to help develop its legislatively‐mandated spending guideline recommendations, and our legislative auditors rely on the economic analysis and real‐time observations of our economic advisory committee members in formulating their independent revenue forecast. These purposes are in no way related to the County Council’s zoning or PUD sponsorship decisions, as he also alleges.