There's safety in numbers

In the past few weeks, the airwaves, newsstands and the blogosphere have been full of the looming crisis facing Maine's municipal budgets if Governor Paul LePage's budget proposal is passed.

As many allege, LePage's proposal would amount to a massive cost-shift onto towns and local property owners.

When the proposed budget was unveiled more than a month ago, it set off a storm of criticism from towns and cities across the state.

In Oxford Hills, municipal officials warned that revenue losses, as well as a potential $1.8 million leap in assessments for the school district, could have three outcomes – deep service cuts, steep tax hikes, or both.  

We don't disagree that LePage's budget is flawed, unfair and extreme.

But it is surprising that not one peep has been heard about the possibility of sharing services between towns as a way to reduce expenses.

LePage's assertion, that towns and cities would be better prepared to weather the coming financial storm if they consolidated services, doesn't accurately reflect reality, but it raises important questions.

Why haven't we heard more proposals for collaborating in public safety?

What about joint-purchasing materials for road maintenance or sharing equipment, facilities and staff?

How about regionalizing some administrative services like general assistance?

Could we save money this way? Could it make service delivery more efficient?

We don't know, because any proposals have yet to be released, at least publicly.

In recent years, there have been some successes, including hiring a joint General Assistance administrator for Paris and Norway. That move has cracked down on attempted and real "double-dipping."

Other proposals, like the Norway-Paris police merger, were unsuccessful.

Identity, as a town, is wrapped up in municipal facilities, services and personnel and residents are understandably reluctant to give up their independence.

But that independence and identity comes with a price tag –  if towns are willing (or able) to pay the bill, more power to them.

We don't know if collaborative efforts will succeed. Regionalized services could easily be more expensive, or less efficient.

But that's the point –  we don't know. We can't take collaborative options off the table as unworkable until they're actually put on it.

Put another way, "economies of scale" could also read "safety in numbers."

The Advertiser Democrat Editorial Board