If taxpayers are ever in doubt about the waste of their tax dollars, they merely need to attend – or view online – a typical city council meeting.
This week’s meeting of Mebane’s city council provided the latest example of public officials’ absolute inability to resist spending precious tax dollars unnecessarily, even frivolous.
Mebane’s city council this week endorsed the idea of spending $190,000 (perhaps even $205,000) for lighting the city’s new water tank now under construction along South Third Street.
Now, what became evident during the discussion is that the water tank construction itself is running under budget – so councilmen apparently feel there’s plenty of money to waste.
The project is currently $40,000 under budget, and the city has not had to draw on the $150,000 contingency kitty, a special pot available for cost overruns or unexpected expenses.
Most taxpayers would think those are good developments. The average person (a category that apparently does not include council members, however) would think: let’s put some unspent money back in the city’s coffers, easing – if ever so slightly – the pressure on taxpayers for funding other, or future, projects.
But not Mebane officials.
No, they want to use up all the money on a silly, frivolous idea to “uplight” the water tank.
Uplighting apparently isn’t the simple, or inexpensive, equivalent of buying some floodlights at a local home improvement store.
It’s going to require $25,000 to $45,000 just to design the placement of the future lighting and another $125,000 to $160,000 for equipment and installation. (And those figures do not include the monthly electric bill for the lighting.)
Even councilmen who are typically more cost-sensitive – namely Tim Bradley and Jonathan White – were gung-ho to squander Mebane’s money for lighting the new water tank.
White’s enthusiasm was particularly misplaced – inasmuch as he apparently thinks an illuminated water tank will be a successful means of advertising the city along the interstate.
To what end – or ultimate benefit – is this expense, we wonder?
We very seriously doubt any company, or potential resident, is going to see the lighted water tank and think, “Oh, I should locate in this city.”
It seems to us the more accurate message – to current residents or potential ones – is: how foolish is this city to waste its resources by lighting up its water tank.
Even on a practical level, the idea is foolish.
We’ve occasionally seen lighted water tanks for municipalities that have these structures within a few hundred yards of the interstate.
But Mebane’s new tank is probably almost a mile or more away from the interstate. No one will be able to see, or read, the signage on a tank at that distance.
Mebane’s current water tower is not lighted.
Neither is Graham’s.
Nor Burlington’s.
There’s an old saying that some folks have more money than sense.
That’s sure the way we suspect Mebane’s council looked to most of its taxpayers this week.
Mebane – and most other local municipalities – are in desperate need of decision-makers who have better judgment and at least a modicum of common sense.
Unfortunately, those traits were in short supply this week in Mebane.
