The Readers: Cut The Government, Charge The Park Patrons

Excerpts from reader e-mail about Tuesday's column, which joked bitterly that no deputy mayors are being fired while local officials try to punish the public first in carrying out the tax cut ordered by the Legislature:

On the prospect of an entrance fee to Fort De Soto Park:

Why should/would anyone complain about paying a few dollars for a safe, pristine, unique facility like Fort Desoto when they willingly pay more to park in downtown St. Petersburg - to say nothing of a day at Busch Gardens or Disneyworld? What am I missing here? -- Dan C.

As I said, Dan, the idea itself is not that outrageous. We have to pay a small fee to get into various state and national parks, after all. (I still think if they did it there should be the option to buy an annual pass.) It's the MOTIVE that I question -- the county administrator tells me there is NO proposal in the budget for doing such a thing to make the necessary cuts; the County Commission would have to take an extra step and go out of its way to punish the citizens.

C'mon Trox, you glossed over the Deputy Mayors so fast I almost missed it - I expected more from you.  Do we really need a mayor,  3 deputy mayors, 2 chiefs and 4 administrators, not to mention untold deputy chiefs, assistants, etc. to do the city's business?  Having been a career bureaucrat myself, I know how easy it is to get top-heavy and then when the axe has to fall, to make the little guys pay for terrible management.  Give the people a chance to weild the axe and watch what gets cut!! -- RAP

Dear RAP: Gee whiz, the HEADLINE of the column was about not firing any deputy mayors, so I don't think I "glossed it over." I think we agree on the central point, that there are no core cuts to the bureaucracy itself being contemplated.

On generous employee packages for days off, pension plans, health benefits etc. for government employees:

My point here, is that government jobs should not be the best paying job in town! They should be employment of last resort for some. There should be few "career" government employees. Their compensation packages should be more inline with the private sector. I have some friends who work for the county. Occasionally they have attempted to go back to work for a private company, but nobody could match or even come close to the benefits they were currently making. No wonder you have "career" government employees. -- Greg Swafford

Well, Mr. Swafford, this is an age-old philosophical question. You get what you pay for so if it's TOO cheap that's not good either. Entire studies have been done on the right level of compensation. I think the general idea is that it ought to be in the middle somewhere, so that folks are neither artificially driven in or out of the public sector simply from that factor. Having said that, I DO think the 20th-century pension concept, which has disappeared from the private sector and real life, has lingered far beyond in the public sector.

And this rather Darwinian approach to public services:

On a side note, non-essential government projects should not be funded with tax dollars. If there is a demand then people will be willing to pay for things such as public parks, libraries, museums, little league fields, etc. I find nothing wrong with a fee for Fort De Soto Park. Your idea of a yearly pass (perhaps a family pass for $20) is a good one and can be instituted for all of the above. If there is a demand then they will survive. -- Rich

Rich, I've heard this line of argument before and am not sure I buy it. I think there are some amenities in a community that the entire community should be happy to underwrite. In other words, all of society benefits if there is good public education; that's why we all have to pay school taxes (instead of only parents). Likewise, public libraries benefit society and I would not charge each person who checks out of a book for their proportionate share of the library's cost. So I'm probably more of a "user fee" guy who would charge a fee for a partial recovery, but not the full cost, e.g. museum admission, SOME little league fee (we could never charge enough for the full cost of the parks), etc....

Comments

[Lorraine Margeson]

Howard,

Last night this link to the Ft. DeSoto fee-based considerations was available online, pdf URL link noted below. I did a blast about it including the BOCC, Mr. Spratt et al. This morning, this link has been disabled. ALL the other previous links are there EXCEPT the Ft. D link, and the budget info page has been changed around OVERNIGHT.

If you could still see this pdf link below.........they are actually considering a $5.00 per car charge at Ft. D........I'm calling county to get a faxed copy.

http://www.pinellascounty.org/budget/08Budget/workshop/BIS_3_6-26-07.pdf

Here's the entire County proposed budget info page:

http://www.pinellascounty.org/budget/presentations08.htm

Even though we are trying to protect our preserves, County is planning some major cuts in our Environmental Lands Deputies, the 10 folks who protect the preserves from poachers and intruders, and the ONLY resource between th insane partying in and around Shell Key Preserve, which activities endanger humans and has bascially eliminated the possibility for the beachnesting birds to succeed in breeding at Shell Key. LIMA Unit gets this axe, we're in BIG trouble.......

Environmental Lands Division Deputies....8 out of the 10 LIMA Deputies CUT.... $946,000.00 reduction, look under Sheriff this pdf file.........page 2.

http://www.pinellascounty.org/budget/08Budget/workshop/BIS_6_6-26-07.pdf

Environmental Management..proposed cuts $798,717.00 seemingly mostly cutting research and education
Page 2, rotate once clockwise.

http://www.pinellascounty.org/budget/08Budget/workshop/BIS_5_6-26-07.pdf

[Jennifer Crosson]

Tuesday, 6/27/07, the Trail by Seminole City Park, 10:40 AM. Tearing up the water pipes for the UMPTEENTH TIME! Two workers on heavy equipment, one digging the other watching, one worker holding up the "STOP" sign on the TRAIL, two other workers watching the above. Need I say more?

[Rich]

Howard,

I agree with your user fee arguement but the fact remains if the community doesn't demand something then the enterprise should fail. Just like in the private sector.

Hernando county wants to spend $2M to replace a library that currently checks out 2 books per day. The City of Tampa now wants to buy the land from the failed developer of the Trump plaza for the Riverwalk. The price he paid for the land is $16M. Is this spending our tax dollars wisely? Couldn't it go to people more in need? How about 16 different million dollar computer training centers in poor neighborhoods?

Iorio has spent millions trying to find an art musuem a home when nobody goes to the one we have. Norman wants to build a $40M sports complex that if is economically viable as he says it is then a private company would come in and do for free.

My library in downtown Tampa has no where near the demand needed to justify the building they are in. If they were cost conscious, like a private enterprise, they would move it to a smaller location with less overhead and the community would not suffer at all.

We spend $6400 a year for each student in grades k-12 according to the NEA's latest figures. For that kind of money we could all be sending our kids to a number of private schools in the area with smaller class sizes and better facilities. Giving them a much better education.

I read a column where people were complaining about Tampa not heating some of their public pools during the winter because of the cuts. I'm sure the 64 people a day that use them can drive an extra 2 miles to the one that they will continue to heat at a cost of nearly $15,000 per month.

The government should tax us to take care of those in need. I have no problem with that. I have no problem funding public education (although I think the private sector would do a far superior job).I hate to see them waste our hard earned money on things that we don't demand. If the government were a private enterprise and they had to compete for our taxes then they would surely be out of business. They don't spend wisely.

[David Mathews]

About Ft. DeSoto,

> "It's the MOTIVE that I question -- the county administrator tells me there is NO proposal in the budget for doing such a thing to make the necessary cuts ..."

There's a lot to be said about not worrying so much about the motives. As a form of punishment, $3 to enter Ft. DeSoto is a lot less painless than walking on the sandspurs on the way to the beach (which I have done plenty of times, without complaint).

If $3 seems too much for anyone, there always remains the other option: Drive down to Anna Maria Island or Longboat Key. Miles and miles of beach with free parking. A lovely beach, too, much more attractive to all the horrendous buildings cluttering up the barrier islands from St. Pete Beach to Clearwater.

But I do have one request: Clearwater beach needs to have a daily rather than hourly fee. I went to Cleatwater beach a year or so ago and walked all the way up to the northernmost tip of Caladesi Island. Paid $9 for parking. That's really absurd.

Sand Key park needs daily fees, too. Putting money in a parking meter for a beach is beyond absurd.

Anyhow, on to a more important subject:

Stewart Brand, "City Planet":

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-5605852912915716592

If you listen carefully to this most optimistic of talks you will learn that the forward-thinking Mr. Brand believes that human population will peak at approximately 9 billion by 2040 and then decline (gently) to 2 billion by 2300 A.D.

One can only imagine what a planet built up for nine billion inhabitants will look like when the population is "only" two billion. There will be ghost towns, ghost cities, and probably ghost nations.

In other words: The entire world will look pretty much like Detoit looks now.

See: http://harpers.org/archive/2007/07/0081594

Florida, of course, won't look like that by 2300 A.D. If the sea levels rise sixty feet most of Florida will be under water. Whatever remains of Florida will receive a thorough thrashing by hurricanes over the next two centuries, too.

In other words: Florida's "return to Nature" will occur rather quickly compared to the rest of the nation.

Needless to say, Florida's return to Nature is a good thing. Not that the state of Florida has much of a choice. Natural forces are much more powerful than humankind.

[David Mathews]

RE: The poor ex-NBA player whose 28,000 sq-ft house is too small for his family.

The wealthy don't know it, but they are the most impoverished of people. Anyone who "needs" a 28,000 sq-ft house is driven insane by his/her own greed, but capitalism honors this sort of insanity.

The treadmill of Greed & Envy never stops. Well, actually, it does stop. Those children will live in a different world than their wealthy gluttonous father.

For those who really want to know how "the other half" lives, I recomment the following lecture:

Rob Neuwirth, The 21st-century Medieval City
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8779859103646494132

One billion people live in this inhumane fashion right now. That number will climb to three billion by 2045.

Not that Americans care. The Earth was created for our consumption. The other six billion humans can live off of our crumbs. Or they can die. Americans don't care in either case.

[David Mathews]

Conservatives are finally beginning to wake up to the new world of resource-constraints and naturally imposed lifestyle changes.

Victor David Hanson, famous for his extreme hatred of the Muslims and warmongering, has finally realized that there are other problems in this world.

In an editorial titled "Food Fight" he describes the escalating price of food and fuel and the rather insane decision to transform food into fuel. Instead of concluding by waving the flag and promises a technological solution, VDH ends ominously with a question:

"The American consumer lifestyle took off thanks to low-cost fuel and food. Once families could drive and eat cheaply, they had plenty of disposable income for housing and consumer goods.

"But if they can't do either anymore, how angry will they get as they buy less and pay more for the very staples of life?"
( http://www.townhall.com/columnists/VictorDavisHanson/2007/06/28/the_impending_food_fight )

This is a question of extreme relevance to oil-and-auto addicted Florida. We are in a rather precarious position.

What sort of impact will $6 a gallon gasoline have upon Florida's economy?

When gasoline becomes scarce and is rationed, how will Florida's tourism-based economy survive?

When transporting food by truck becomes prohibitively expensive how will Floridians eat?

When driving becomes a luxury affordable only to the wealthy how will millions of Floridians evacuate from the state's coastline when hurricanes approach?

Florida needs to begin planning for the post-automobile future. But who wants to plan for the future when there is so much shopping to do today?

[David Mathews]

Hello Mr. Troxler:

So far in the last week, I have visited several beautiful places:

1. Brooker Creek Preserve(Sunday)
2. Ft. DeSoto (Tuesday)
3. Upper Tampa Bay Park (Yesterday)
4. Weedon Island (Today)

In that time I have seen plenty of native Florida wildlife which have successfully flourished in Florida for millions of years. Every living thing -- it seems -- is much older and certainly much wiser that humankind.

I can barely survive the hot sun but all of these animals have prospered without any of the technological crutches which make life possible for Florida's millions of human inhabitants.

The Native Americans also survived and prospered for thousands of years in Florida without the benefits of any our of modern energy-intensive technologies. I cannot help but admire those people and pity those Americans who, like myself, could never survive in this harsh environment without these crutches which we all take for granted.

Those who want to argue can argue, but my opinion is: Florida was a living pristine place after ten thousand years of Native American. Two hundred years of American civilization has served to destroy, pollute, degrade and impoverish this land.

We've created an asphalt-covered wasteland. Those who inherit this mess without the benefit of the technological crutches will soon discover that it is nearly impossible survive in an asphalt-covered wasteland.

Is any other lifestyle possible for an intelligent mammal inhabiting the Earth?

Consider for a moment the dolphins:

http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=3568

If you listen carefully to the lecture and pay attention to the charts you will notice one rather significant fact:

Dolphins have inhabited the Earth for 15,000,000 years.

Homo sapiens have inhabited the Earth for only 100,000 years.

In other words: Humans have only existed for .7% as long as the dolphins.

Given the condition of the world and human nature, I have reached the following conclusion:

* It is more likely that dolphins will continue living for another 15,000,000 years than for humankind to survive for another 100,000 years.

Humans live only for today. No one is looking out for the future survival of our species. No one is looking ahead even fifty years, much less one thousand years.

It is a tragedy of cosmic proportions. I cannot help but love, admire and envy the dolphins. I wonder if they will remember us after we are all gone?

Now I must visit another beautiful place and admire the enduring world of Nature.

[Lorraine Margeson]

David,

I would love to meet you. And there ARE ways for humans to live in this asphalt-covered jungle (I'm an ex-Big Apple girl, I should know)...and live with the impediments with which we all surround ourselves........we can make an effort to conjoin with our natural surroundings, inhibited as we are by our need to control, and we can in our humble way make improvements in attitude as we go along and DO SOMETHING POSITIVE......with fortitude, appreciation, and a will to fight for the future. And if the benefit does not fall in our lifetime, it may indeed benefit future beings. Because we will still have something to marvel at while we are alive........but what of those in the future?

Lorraine Margeson

[David Mathews]

Hello Lorraine,

> "... but what of those in the future?"

The future is what America has lost. The future is also what humankind has lost.

The aspahlt-covered wasteland is what the future shall inherit from this generation. They won't enjoy it so much as we because they won't have gasoline, electricity, shopping or food in order to distract them from the knowledge that humans have really made a mess of the Earth.

All of these things are passing away. Nothing will survive.

The Earth is running out of those resources that have made this world possible. Future generations will have no choice except to live with nothing: No cars, no air conditioners, no grocery stores, no malls and no internet.

They will have no choice except to live off the land. But our generation has killed the land. Asphalt makes very poor farmland.

That's the future. It is not the hopeful future that people prefer, it is the real future which is formed from the consequences of our decisions.

If we cared about the future undoubtedly we would have lived differently in the past.

The dolphins were never so stupid as to destroy their means of existence. That is why they have survived and prospered for millions of years.

Isn't it a pity? Isn't it a tragedy?