 |
Editor's ViewpointMeditations Of A Minnesota Mossback |
Children - Not A One-time Cash Purchase . Moving Beyond "It Would Be Nice"
Several years ago, I read that it costs, on average, $9,000 to keep a dog.
It would be silly to budget for the purchase of a dog, and then fail to plan for the 14-17 years of maintenance and upkeep costs entailed in keeping it - costs that far exceed the original $300 one may have paid for that purebred with papers.
Families are big commitments, too: children aren't inexpensive! Pets and families are all long-term investments, not one-time cash purchases: those financial commitments extend far into the future.
We as taxpayers need to be just as committed and informed of the care and upkeep required to keep our state's highways, bridges, transitways and recreation areas operational - at least until they are taken out of service.
Unlike children, bridges don't move out - but they do wear out. At some point, they have to be replaced.
Before committing to the initial construction expense of infrastructure, it would make sense to ask hard questions about the long-term financial commitments required to keep that community center, trail system or mass transit line in working order.
Beyond the initial capital investment, the yearly maintenance of facilities can cost between 10 and 20 percent of the cost of construction.
When legislators and city councils pass budgets that are based on continued increases in collectible revenue, they are risking the same disaster that befell some homebuyers who assumed their disposal income would continue to increase to cover those Adjustable Rate Mortgages.
Sometimes, life just doesn't work that way.
That being said, before the Hugo City Council decides to make a serious financial commitment to the construction of a YMCA, I hope residents move beyond "it would be nice" to asking "how will we budget for it?"
Hugo has already chipped in $1 million to the Oneka Elementary School gym, and it's being used. There are no guarantees this new YMCA won't simply replace the old one down on Orchard Avenue in White Bear Lake, a healthy drive from Hugo.
Certainly, a YMCA is a different animal from the Shoreview Community Center, where maintenance costs have been higher than expected. To keep that pool filled, the drain on the city's general fund for operating costs continues.
Moreover, in tough economic times, families may be tempted to drop their membership, increasing that tax burden; this scenario is still playing out.
Recently, Centerville was awarded a $750,000 grant for trails and sidewalks, a laudable success. But it will cost the city over $350,000 for its share of the project, and that doesn't address maintenance.
"Free money" clearly comes at a cost.
These questions get more complicated - but no less important - when we move to the state level, where elected officials often have dollar signs in their eyes when federal funding comes into the picture.
Before the legislature figures out a way to get around Gov. Tim Pawlenty's veto and take that next step toward a mass transit system that will never be in the black, I think we all need to take a hard look at the financial commitments it will take just to keep the line running.
I'm not trying to suggest that the Twin Cities should expect its light rail system to pay for itself. Even in cities where mass transit has been operating for well over a century - such as the Métro in Paris (an estimated 6,000,000 people ride it each day), or the Tube in London (3,000,000 riders daily) - these systems are heavily subsidized.
In New York, where - according to Wikipedia - two-thirds of the nation's rail riders and one-third of the total number of transit users in the entire country are concentrated, the system is nowhere near self-supporting. In fact, according to the Federal Transit Administration, fares only cover 54% of New York City's transit system operating costs; in Boston, it's 31%.
Has somebody figured out what we're going to give up so we can afford to build the Rush Line Corridor? I'd like to think so.
Federal money "left on the table" does not always constitute a "missed opportunity." That's our money, folks! If Minnesota walks away from that matching money, we just might be demonstrating a real concern for our financial future.
We should not commit to new capital projects until we have budgeted for their life cycle costs.
This is called accountability. It is related to good fiscal planning, and it emerges when people - and newspapers - ask questions.