I love techno gadgets. Cell phones, iPods, surround-sound systems, laptops, even the integration of technology in my car. It is all fascinating. Ironically, most of us rarely use such technology to its full capacity. We use our microwaves to reheat things or pop popcorn. We use our cell phones to call and text, and we use our computers to check e-mail, cruise the net and write. We rarely program our microwaves to cook a meal two hours before we get home. We don’t synch up our cell phones to our computers with scheduling reminders. And many folks even struggle to set up their DVR to record their favorite shows.
Much the same often happens in local government, where we have stellar programs and areas of interest that are rarely fully utilized by the public. If a county or city government wishes to hold spending down, it should spend some time examining how efficient and effective it is in all areas. Furthermore, it should spend time looking at how the various programs are utilized by the public.
Several good examples come to mind. Parks and recreation departments, senior service centers, health departments. How many people are using these services? How much do these services cost based on the number of people who use them? When a health department stays open after hours to save taxpayers the cost of paying for emergency room care, how many people use the health department over the emergency room?
Senior centers are usually categorized as “quality of life” enhancements to local government in those communities that have them. They aren’t cheap to operate and usually provide a host of programs, meeting space, food programs, and even transit for some of their elderly populations. How many people benefit? The truth is that many can, but sometimes it’s a truly small number. In other cases the numbers ebb and flow by season or particular program offered.
Community colleges also bear closer scrutiny. Yes, they are a benefit to those communities that have them. Yes, they assist folks transitioning in the work force to acquire new skill sets. And in those technological areas, they do phenomenally well. But even as they implore county commissioners for progressively more money to expand, they are often a community’s largest advertising account at the local paper as they have trouble filling their classes in other areas. If they would simply focus on what the community wants, they would save money and not need to expand. Advertising because they can’t fill classes — even while saying they’re bursting at the seams — is a bit hypocritical.
The point I’m making is not that these programs are bad or even unnecessary, but taking a closer look at the populations they’re serving, the quality of that service, and the number of people served might present decision makers with areas that can legitimately be cut. Likewise, such an examination might present the opportunity to enhance areas that are truly utilized and need to grow.
I can truly say that I utilize almost 100 percent of my car’s technology. Radio is programmed, mileage is constantly calculated, tires rotated to maximize mileage, synthetic oil used to prolong distances between changes, and I even know how to reset the “check engine” light. But I also don’t utilize my cell phone nearly as much as I could, and if I had a VCR it would still blink 12:00. Let’s hope that our local governments don’t let their various components atrophy without further scrutiny. When I let my VCR blink 12:00, I’m the one who’s wasted money. When a local government does it with an underutilized or wasteful program, we all pay for the waste.
Chad Adams is Director of the Center for Local Innovation.