Comments on: Commissioners: empty words, no action

By: Jim McNamara

Jim McNamara — Thu, 07 May 2009 15:42:45 +0000

For a county that is short on funds, you would think they would do what they could to bring in more money. In the area of one applying for a CCW permit, I wonder how much money Allen county is loosing to the surounding counties for our residents to get their permits. At a cost of 55.00 dollars per applicant many of our residents are encouraged to go to the adjecent counties for the permit due to the slow turn around in Allen county. This process should take seven days or less just like the surounding counties, but Allen county takes at least 30 days. Just why should I spend 55.00 for this service in Allen county when I can go next door and get the same service , at the same cost, in less than 7 days??? Nothing but politics, and thats just what all Americans are fed up with. Instead of fixing problems by improving services we would rather talk about raising taxes. This situtation with CCW in Allen county is a disgrace. Campaining for the Sheriff’s job and doing the sheriff’s job are Two different things.

By: DrTorch

DrTorch — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:35:58 +0000

Ron,
Thanks for the response. Many people seem to mention the Administrator, so that does seem a place to start. Is the position “needed”? Hard to say, but funny thing is, if you get rid of such positions, organizations often learn to adapt. That might mean eliminating redundancy and unnecessary operations. That would benefit everyone (and add even more savings!)

I think everyone would be appreciative if you offered concrete areas to reduce costs. It would give the average citizen an entree into this discussion, and they could do their own CBA for each idea.

It would also challenge the Commissioners, b/c right now it’s easy for them to hide behind the vaguaries and complexities of a large budget. Throw out some specifics and they have to become specific.

By: rlederman

rlederman — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:31:35 +0000

That’s a fair question, Torch. I’ve not looked closely at where the county is spending money. Sneary and Reiff should have a better picture of it than I do. (And I could have as clear a picture if I had looked at the budget with any real focus.)

That said, we in the private sector have dealt with pay cuts. That’s a start. Cutting some positions is another. The administrator, if she has to go, could go. Both Sneary and Reiff seem to think so, one having campaigned on it and another now advocating it. That’s two of the 2-1 or 3-0 vote needed to make it so. I’m not suggesting the administrator isn’t needed. I’m suggesting the county might be able to make do anyway.

All in all, however, I don’t have specific cuts. I’m not in a position to make them, either. But when faced with the overall choices of paying more taxes or seeing some more county government employees go, it’s not a tough choice. I elected the three there to figure out how to make it work. That said, I’ll look closer at it and answer your question better..

I understand the argument you make about people having paid for services. It’s valid. I’ll go one further and say most people don’t buy my argument about limited government, nor have we seen it since pre-FDR. So it’s nothing people can look back to.

By: DrTorch

DrTorch — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:18:04 +0000

This comment can be interpreted as hostile; a challenge toward someone who “thinks he knows so much.” Please don’t interpret it that way, it’s not intended to be so.

Since you pay attention, where do you think cuts should be made? I know from a libertarian perspective, you would probably advocate that many of the county expenditures are unnecessary, and that’s fine. Some of those are worth pointing to. But, given that people have paid their taxes, and have some expectation of a return for those fees, are there areas within the current governmental structure that could readily be trimmed? Either the budget is too large, or the services provided serve far too narrow of the taxpayers.