County spending not sustainable

To the Editor:

Should taxpayer dollars be spent foolishly just because it is “recommended?” Should taxpayers be all right with the fact that we have spent over $400,000 dollars already this year just on Highway Department purchases? Should we be all right knowing that we spent $40,000 dollars for the county engineer to have a fancy new SUV to drive as his personal vehicle – hard to stomach. Then we find out that the local GM dealer three blocks away from the extravagant new courthouse doesn’t get a chance to bid.

Apparently it was justified because if FEMA comes to town they would hate to ride in one of the three or four minivans the county already owns.

Then there is this track loader purchase. Why was there only one bid? Come on. Did we need to spend 5, 10 even 15 thousand dollars more than a comparable competitive machine? Do the commissioners even realize what they are spending money on? Was even one question asked by anyone other than the commissioner from Houston? When spending upwards of $70,000 dollars shouldn’t there be comparisons?  Shouldn’t saving taxpayer dollars be priority number one?

I understand the need for the loader, but do we need every bell and whistle? Just like that SUV.  It should not be so easy to spend taxpayer dollars. With family budgets tighter and tighter, why does it seem so easy for this county to continue on their spending spree?  Why does it seem that the commissioner from Houston is the only one on the board that seems to care?

Good leaders think to the future not just the present. The population is decreasing and aging, and there is less state funding. If you will not cut services, then buildings and capital purchases need to be looked at. The current level of spending is not sustainable.

 

Matt Klug

Caledonia, Minn.

up arrow