In general, government should exist to provide necessary services and ensure public safety. Particularly in tight budgeting times, those must be the priorities.
The City of Monroe, like most municipalities, finds itself in a tight budget spot. It must find $490,000 to trim from its 2009 proposed budget to stay within the state-imposed 2 percent revenue increase.
Health care costs and union employee pay raises continue to outpace the allowable levy increase, and this year the skyrocketing price of road salt adds to the dilemma.
The Monroe City Council's Finance and Taxation Committee last Wednesday outlined some of the areas that might face a budget ax or scalpel. Among them is the extremely popular, and somewhat controversial, Spring Clean-Up Days program.
Clean-Up Days, which occur over two weeks, allow Monroe residents to clear their basements and garages of excess clutter and garbage every spring. Items are placed on the curb or terrace to be picked up by city crews.
The program has been somewhat controversial because of the headaches it causes for police and the city when people pick up items off properties unlawfully.
The program is free to the public, with the exception of some items like refrigerators, freezers, dehumidifiers, air conditioners and tires, which will be picked up if a fee is paid.
The program, headaches aside, is a wonderful service for the city to provide its residents. It's a cheap and convenient way for people to get rid of items they no longer use.
But the program is not an essential service, and it is costly - about $80,000 a year. Given the city's financial situation, it would be reasonable for aldermen to decide to end the program, or at least charge a fee that allows property owners to foot the bill.
Meanwhile, the city also is looking at changes to its health plan to save taxpayers dollars. It should. The health insurance costs are coming in at about 20 percent more for 2009 than in 2008. Obviously, it's the biggest driver of the budget gap.
Possible adjustments include changing insurance companies or raising the city's deductible amount. City employees very well may end up paying more for insurance, or receive lesser coverage. Given the tough financial times, and the realities private sector employees face regarding insurance, that would be a tough but appropriate sacrifice for city workers to make.
Council members should make increasing any city fees a last-resort decision. Fees for building permits and some others have not increased since 2005. But given the tough financial times for many of the city's tax-paying residents, asking for more from residents and small businesses is not a desirable budget solution.
Finally, it's been noted that the 3.2 percent raise in employee wages negotiated with the union is another factor creating the budget hole. Those raises, obviously, are a commitment. But before future negotiations, city leaders first should consider average pay increases in the city's private sector. In many cases, they'd find increases lesser than 3.2 percent, with some employees receiving no pay raises at all. It's tough out here. City government pay scales, funded by private citizens, should more closely reflect that reality.
The City of Monroe, like most municipalities, finds itself in a tight budget spot. It must find $490,000 to trim from its 2009 proposed budget to stay within the state-imposed 2 percent revenue increase.
Health care costs and union employee pay raises continue to outpace the allowable levy increase, and this year the skyrocketing price of road salt adds to the dilemma.
The Monroe City Council's Finance and Taxation Committee last Wednesday outlined some of the areas that might face a budget ax or scalpel. Among them is the extremely popular, and somewhat controversial, Spring Clean-Up Days program.
Clean-Up Days, which occur over two weeks, allow Monroe residents to clear their basements and garages of excess clutter and garbage every spring. Items are placed on the curb or terrace to be picked up by city crews.
The program has been somewhat controversial because of the headaches it causes for police and the city when people pick up items off properties unlawfully.
The program is free to the public, with the exception of some items like refrigerators, freezers, dehumidifiers, air conditioners and tires, which will be picked up if a fee is paid.
The program, headaches aside, is a wonderful service for the city to provide its residents. It's a cheap and convenient way for people to get rid of items they no longer use.
But the program is not an essential service, and it is costly - about $80,000 a year. Given the city's financial situation, it would be reasonable for aldermen to decide to end the program, or at least charge a fee that allows property owners to foot the bill.
Meanwhile, the city also is looking at changes to its health plan to save taxpayers dollars. It should. The health insurance costs are coming in at about 20 percent more for 2009 than in 2008. Obviously, it's the biggest driver of the budget gap.
Possible adjustments include changing insurance companies or raising the city's deductible amount. City employees very well may end up paying more for insurance, or receive lesser coverage. Given the tough financial times, and the realities private sector employees face regarding insurance, that would be a tough but appropriate sacrifice for city workers to make.
Council members should make increasing any city fees a last-resort decision. Fees for building permits and some others have not increased since 2005. But given the tough financial times for many of the city's tax-paying residents, asking for more from residents and small businesses is not a desirable budget solution.
Finally, it's been noted that the 3.2 percent raise in employee wages negotiated with the union is another factor creating the budget hole. Those raises, obviously, are a commitment. But before future negotiations, city leaders first should consider average pay increases in the city's private sector. In many cases, they'd find increases lesser than 3.2 percent, with some employees receiving no pay raises at all. It's tough out here. City government pay scales, funded by private citizens, should more closely reflect that reality.
