So Statham officials feel the need to hire a full-time city administrator. Some council members believe that the city would save money if it spends around $80,000 for an administrator.
“That would more than pay for the position,” said councilman Perry Barton. “The way you break out of the recessions is to have more firepower for the city.”
Uh, not really.
Government leaders often justify creating new positions by claiming it will save money. I’ve covered a lot of governments over the past 30 years and I’ve never seen one save money by spending more money. It never, ever works out that way.
But I agree that Statham may need a more professional administrative system than it has now. For the past five years, Barton and his colleagues have spent more money each year in the town that they have taken in. Only by raising taxes two years ago and raiding its utility fund has the city been able to stay afloat. Statham’s financial management is a textbook on how not to run a town.
The real problem in Statham isn’t the lack of an administrator, it’s the lack of courage by the city council in getting its spending under control.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)