Having been in the business world for over 2 decades (enhanced by formal training in my Master's degree in Business Administration), I have had many experiences with a concept called ECONOMIES OF SCALE (the concept that as something grows larger, the 'next' increment of production should cost slightly less than the last increment since fixed costs are being spread over a larger number of articles).
This economic principal should apply to all aspects of 'production' -- manufacturing, service, AND GOVERNMENT!
Take for example a company that makes 'widgets'. Before the company can start producing they need to 'buy' a place to produce and all the buildout necessary to do so, raw materials to make a widget, and the labor to produce a widget. If the company makes only one widget, then the COST is the place of production, plus the buildout, plus the raw material to make it, plus the labor to make it. If the company makes 2 widgets, the cost PER WIDGET is now 1/2 of the production place, plus the raw materials divided by 2, and then the labor divided by 2 (both material and labor could also be 'bought' at a discount since volume generally means lower pricing). I think you can see where this is going. After making 'many' widgets, the real driver becomes the raw material and labor costs (incremental cost) as the FIXED part is now spread over MANY widgets.
When I was on the village board in Pleasant Prairie, I often asked why is it that as the village grows the 'incremental cost' continues to rise rather than decline. If a new development adds 100 homes to the village, those additional 100 homes should benefit from the fact that infrastructure is ALREADY IN PLACE, and that only INCREMENTAL additions need to be made - therefore total spending per unit should decrease.
BUT, somehow our free-wheeling village administrative and financial gurus continue to believe that the revenue generated from the INCREMENTAL additions IS NOT enough to cover its costs and therefore more money is needed from elsewhere (EXISTING TAXPAYER BASE!!).
As we ALL know that members of the "THE VILLAGE IS GREAT AND DOES EVERYTHING PERFECTLY" crowd regularly visit this blog, I leave it up to them to tell us why this is the case in Pleasant Prairie. I can think of a couple of reasonable explanations, but will wait for the INSIDERS to comment first.
Thanks goodness that the WI Legislature has implemented a 2% or up to % growth cap on year over year tax levy increases. If it wasn't for this, (AND PLENTY OF WHINING AND MOANING EVIDENCE EXISTS TO PROVE THIS) YOUR village leaders would have a free for all with tax increases. HUG your local REPUBLICAN legislators as they are the only roadblock to more free-wheeling spending!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Don't they already charge each new property an "impact fee' of almost $900? I guess it's because they feel they have to maintain each new subdivision even if there is only one home. Maybe it's time to change the practice. I guess one thing we need to know is how many homes are built that aren't in subdivisions? This is the kind of stories I like to see!
I view the budget that was passed last Fall as totally irresponsible with the increase in spending and borrowing. This at a time when it was already evident that the economy was in a major slow down and that properties would probably decrease in value.
Our Village is totally out of touch with the average resident who cannot continue to pay more in taxes and fees with incomes that do not rise accordingly.
But I have heard many times from Village board members (especially Steinbrink) statements to the effect that if you don't like it you can move--there are plenty of people who want to take your place. That hurts a lot when you are a long term resident and really sours people's attitudes toward the Village.
This Village is a tax hell for the older residents, who do not use as many services as the newcomers with children in school, etc.
My family and I were considering moving to Pleasant Prairie. I think you all have talked us right out of it. Or by some chance, is there something GOOD about Pleasant Prairie?
Nice job, Alex. Your total blindness to facts and blubbering about things you know nothing about makes the Village look inefficient, when it's not. Now if you'd only write your Econ 101 teacher and apologize to him for failing the class.
Brilliant.
Dear Anonymous #1,
You should still move to Pleasant Prairie. I am very sincere about this. There ARE a LOT of good things here, and if you spend a little time studying what ACTUALLY has been said over the past years you will realize that this is so, and I have been critical of only some relatively small number of things.
The people are great. The RECPLEX is great. The weather is great (most of the time), etc, etc.
The purpose of this blog though is NOT to be a cheerleader for the village government. They have the BULLY PULPIT and do quite a good job of tooting their own horns.
BUT, every organizations can stand some improvements, and some change. When an organization (or government) tells its members (of taxpayers) that EVERYTHING is perfect and that they should go away because they know not what they are talking about, I HAVE A PROBLEM and I am NOT ALONE.
SO, please be open-minded and make your decision based on ALL input available. I hope that you join us in this great community.
ONE FINAL THOUGHT: If it was SO BAD here, and it was SO IMPOSSIBLE to manage in it, don't you think I and my family would have left? I like it here and intend to stay, and I hope you do to.
Dear Anonymous #2,
Must you continue embarassing yourself? BUT, please do.
What is it that you KNOW about village government, and explain to me WHY my original idea about efficiency CANNOT work in this or any other government. I think you know the answers and are just so incredibly afraid to accept it.
Stop with the attacks about which grade school, or high school, or college teacher should apologize. You are starting to look a little (actually a lot) silly.
PUT SOME SUBSTANCE BEHIND YOUR ATTACKS. I WILL TAKE YOU ON WITH ANY REAL ARGUMENT YOU HAVE TO MAKE.
BUT, be careful, because we might find out WHO you are!!!
Alex just said more nice things about the "village" than he has over the past 4 years. Too late Mr Negative! I know you are always telling people to apologize how come you or your wife never apologized the all the farmers for her great line - "I can't believe you lost to a farmer?"
You can dish it out but can't take it apparently.
That doesn't sound like something that Alex's wife would say.
Also, Alex didn't just lose to a farmer, but also to a Village President, a State Representative, and a good old boy, and so on.....
Remember the movie Ruthless People when the guy tried to rob the clown in front of all the Police? I think Anonymous number two fits the bill when the Officer, said, "this could be the dumbest person on the face of the earth".
Well written article.
Thanks.
This blog has been dormant now for a period of time, but recent financial events in the village might necessitate a return.
These folks have to be reminded that it's not their money.
AND it is our duty to monitor our government otherwise they believe they have the right to do whatever they want.
Again, thanks,
Alex
Post a Comment