When most of us spend our personal funds for a good or service, we strive for maximum value because our funds are finite.
Public spending, whether at the Federal, state or local level, occurs because of borrowed money, taxes and user fees ultimately paid for by an overlapping pool of individuals and businesses.
Unfortunately, Carson City officials continue to serially ignore value-focused public spending. Despite a looming operating budget deficit larger than last year’s $3.7 million, we have seen zero progress in aligning expenses with revenues. An onerous long-term public debt of over $4,000 per resident (excluding interest costs) has accomplished little toward shoring up our deteriorating infrastructure. Reserves have already been largely spent down.
Whether Federal, state or local government funds a project, these recent spending examples do not follow the value principle.
• A new Community Center events sign ($99,000) when the existing one is serviceable if not optimal.
• Spending $400,000 on elaborate ‘Welcome to Carson City’ highway signs when more modest signs could have accomplished the same end.
• Over $300,000 has been spent on metal art work along the 395 bypass.
• A $25,000 consultant to develop solutions for non-paying tenants (+$700,000 owed) at the city-owned Eagle Valley golf course rather than tasking city Parks & Recreation management with the job.
• The city’s $110,000 annual loss to own and operate a cemetery.
• Borrowing $1.1 million ($1.457 million with interest) to buy the Fireside building on east Procter Street when it can’t adequately maintain existing buildings, balance its budget without tax increases, regularly dips into sparse reserves, and raises user fees.
• The Business Resource and Innovation Center (BRIC) has not created one documented new business in almost three years of operation. What tangible return on investment (new public revenues, increased private economic activity, new jobs) has the city realized and reported from the $1,000,000 spent on building renovations, moving costs, building maintenance at the vacated Northgate complex, and operating expenses? Is conducting business classes and counseling sessions, the main activities at BRIC, appropriate when we already have several business schools in the region and over a dozen existing business advisory agencies?
• Proposed spending of $150,000 to narrow Carson street with an incomplete 395 bypass.
• The city library recently installed redundant computers for $434,000 when the Boys and Girls Club of Western Nevada, privately-funded Computer Corps and the public school district can satisfy these needs.
• The city library installed a library materials vending machine for $161,000 at the local Boys and Girls Club when existing club buses could transport children to and from the full library one mile away.
• For over four years the city has claimed “it doesn’t have $125,000” to restore the library’s roof and replace absent perimeter caulking necessary to prevent moisture and pest intrusion. Further delay and deterioration will require a full roof replacement at double the cost. Do we wait for full roof failures (Eagle Valley Middle School and Fire Station 51) to “find” emergency funding, or should our community proactively maintain city facilities? The city librarian has $200,000 in her gift fund, but states she has no responsibility for the building her operation occupies on a daily basis.
• Our small city library has a glut of managers: a director, an assistant director and a marketing/outreach coordinator to “publicize” the library, plus several front-line managers. One director should be able to supervise the front-line managers.
• The city manager’s recent proposal to hire an assistant city manager at a total cost with benefits of over $100,000/year despite the numerous department heads and management personnel already on the city payroll.
When will we see public money spent more prudently, i.e., as if it were coming out of public officials’ personal pockets, and the diligent pursuit of operating efficiencies?