Fuel, mandates pinch budgets

Salt Lake County's 2006 budget deliberations provide food for thought about rising fuel costs.

County Mayor Peter Corroon projects that the county will spend $3 million to $4 million more on gas and utilities in 2006. That will come on top of higher insurance premiums and federal election mandates.

Corroon says county agencies that want something new need to cut something else from their respective budgets. It's time to establish priorities, Corroon says.

Motor-fuel prices have tapered in recent weeks, but they are hardly affordable for consumers, let alone government agencies that run fleets of vehicles. When combined with sharply higher utility bills, government agencies will be faced with the choices of trimming budgets, dipping into reserves or raising taxes. Of the three, the latter choice is particularly distasteful to property owners who are contending with high fuel prices, hikes in utility bills and higher-priced consumer goods.

Salt Lake County's budget considerations are a harbinger of things to come in other segments of government. No agencies can escape rising fuel costs, but leaders must establish firm expectations that agencies conserve motor fuel, natural gas and other utilities as much as possible. Elected officials and appointed executives need to lead out in "shared sacrifice," to borrow Corroon's words. That means driving on government business only when necessary and driving fuel-efficient vehicles.

Local government bodies would do well to adopt a "shared sacrifice" philosophy as they prepare their financial plans for the coming year. Constituents would rather stomach cuts in services than pay higher taxes. But they, too, will sacrifice under leaner, meaner budget plans. And this will come on top of sacrifices at home due to higher food, gasoline and heating prices. Locally elected officials need to be mindful of these dynamic as they prepare their financial plans for the upcoming year.