By Marcia Fariss
I am no financial wizard, but the Finance Committee's recommendation to cut Recreation Department services does not sound reasonable. I am basing that judgment on information presented at the budget meetings and in previous studies. The Recreation Department seems to be one of the few city services that generates an income and is nearly totally self-sufficient. Why would a financially neutral service be cut? That doesn't make sense.
In fact, it seems to me that one of the few areas where the city has an opportunity to increase income is the Recreation Department. The current class fees are quite low, while the quality of the activities is high.
Recreational fees could easily be increased without loss of participants; our city has few low-income residents, and such an increase should not be a hardship for anyone. In fact, fee increases could be such that they not only cover the entire cost of the Recreational Department but help fund other necessary city services as well.
Typically, one of the recommendations included reducing the size of the custodial staff. I would like to note that these folks are not on the high end of city expenses. The custodial staff and their salaries should be the last place the council looks to make cuts! The greatest expenses (two-thirds of our budget, if I recall the figures) are the for administrative staff and public safety. Why should cuts even be considered in other areas?
An aside regarding custodial service: It seems to me that the custodians could also work for the Senior Center. I shudder when I watch the seniors setting up tables, lifting chairs, etc., for their various activities. These folks may be active, but they are not weightlifters, and I personally do not think they should be responsible for setting up large, heavy tables and lifting or stacking chairs, etc. Should one of them be injured, the City of Saratoga could be sued. It would reduce the possibility of injury to our seniors if the city custodians did the set-up for all senior activities. Instead of reducing the city custodial staff, give them additional or compensatory income by being employed by the Senior Center; both the custodians and the seniors would benefit, and we would have a win-win situation.
Several of the recommendations by the Finance Committee seem reasonable; however, cutting recreation (which affects all ages of our community) and custodial staff does not make fiscal sense. Is it possible that the Finance Committee's recommendations are being influenced by those for whom they perform a large percentage of their work, namely the administrative staff?
In owning and managing a small professional office for over 15 years, I have learned to operate on a shoestring budget. One of the first and most important rules I learned was that the "fatted calf" (the major expense) is the first area reduced. Reducing neutral cash-flow areas and low-end expenditures produces minimal results. One does not need to be an economics professor to see that. You must seriously consider making substantial cuts in our most costly areas, no matter whose ego or personality might be bruised. If cuts are made in any other areas, you would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Please use good business practices in your budget decisions; do not be swayed by personalities, self-serving and survival arguments put forth by the administration or any other department whose budget consumes the majority of our income.
Marcia Fariss of Saratoga Glen Place is a small-business owner and community activist. A copy of this opinion piece was sent to the `Saratoga City Council.
This article appeared in the Saratoga News, February 5, 1997.
©1997 Metro Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.