Staff Blog
Three new Council members prove capable of original thought, would like a crack at solving budget crisis
It's hard to believe these days, but it appears as if three City Council members -- and their respective staffs -- are actually doing their jobs. (Unless, of course, you count federal indictments and creating racist signs as part of a council member/staffer's job. In that case, everything is fine.)
Today, Council members Bill Green, Maria Quinones-Sanchez, and Curtis Jones, all freshmen, released 15 legitimate, thoughtful, progressive-oriented ways to save the city money in light of these hard economic times. (Mayor Nutter has said that "everything is on the table" when it comes to needed cuts.)
The best thing about the 15 ideas is that they are sure to make entrenched bureaucrats sitting on fluffy patronage jobs a bit uncomfortable. For example, the council members suggest increasing car sharing (alleged savings $2.72 million annually), cutting all but necessary travel (alleged savings $100,000 annually), banning swag and custom printing (alleged savings $100,000 annually), and hiring more auditors (alleged savings nearly $3 million annually).
It's actually appalling that many of the suggestions aren't already in use. One, for example, is switching to the electronic transfer of funds (alleged savings $2 million annually) from the state to the city. The city still accepts paper checks, which get lost, thereby losing interest! You've got to be kidding.
Another suggestion is the electronic sending of all reports and memos. Bill Green attached a letter that was mailed to his office -- which costs, of course, 42 cents -- from someone inside City Hall (alleged savings $25,000 annually).
Here's an overview of the plan, which, they say, could save between $57 to $73 million a year:
 |
For the full presentation, click the-freshman-15.
Now, of course, this is Philadelphia. We all know that not every one of these suggestions will be implemented because: 1) some people, I'm willing to bet, are horrified at the idea of not having a city car -- or swag! -- at their disposal, 2) because some city workers simply cannot understand this thing called 'the Internet,' 3) some officials will be all pissy, saying the PC version of: "these young whippersnappers are taking the spotlight away from the problem that I'm supposed to 'solve' and take credit for, damnit," and, finally, 4) this is just not the way things have always been.
Perhaps, though, the most dangerous excuse of all is the idea that the city does not have the money to spend now to make these cost-saving moves for the future. (Some of the suggestions include an expenditure, like hiring audit staff, while others, like switching to VoIP phone service, don't.) If anyone says that this is a reason for not being able to reduce costs, they are lying. As far as funding for cities, things will not be getting any better, regardless of who becomes President. Holding off necessary changes like these in hopes of some future windfall isn't just silly, it's outright dangerous to Philly's future. If the freshmen's numbers are right, the city will be able to pay for the initial monetary outlay with the new savings in the near future.
Let's sum it up this way: if the city ends up cutting some valueable programs or positions and, at the same time, ignores the above proposals, there is an extreme and blatant unfairness in this process.
