CITY WISH LIST O PROJECTS IS TRIMMED BY THE TIMES

The city charter, adopted by Cape Girardeau voters more than a decade ago, calls for an annual evaluation and five-year projection on municipal capital needs. As anticipated by charter authors, the requirement will accompany the city through good times and bad, the evaluation remaining a fixture even if the results shift with the economic times. The current exercise by city officials is a reflection of modern circumstances; the planning must go on but cast in the light of more limited resources.

Meeting earlier this week to discuss the 1992-97 capital improvements plan, city council members and municipal administrators refreshed themselves on the tightrope that must be walked in putting together what is both wish list and blueprint. The proposal this year has been trimmed almost $12 million (an average of $2.5 million a year), a recognition that many speculative projects, especially those that require voter approval, aren't feasible in the current fiscal climate. A shift in thinking is being undertaken to concern council members with linking how much a program costs with how much revenue it produces.

For example, it was pointed out that park and recreation services cost Cape Girardeau coffers $1.72 million a year, yet generate only about $500,000 in revenue. The public works department has expenditures of $6.5 million, yet produces revenue totaling just $3.8 million.

Don't misunderstand this argument: We don't expect, say, public safety agencies (which spend $5.5 million a year while taking in $150,000) to turn a profit. Your tax dollars are paid to ensure these basic services are provided. However, it is useful to adopt this type of thought process with regard to capital improvements. It can indicate, one, the possibility that some services are being undersold and could produce more revenue, and, two, the passion with which some of these services are embraced. If people want more softball fields in the city, something that does not claim a top funding priority, are they willing to pay for them in some fashion? If citizens in great enough numbers want an enhancement in street improvement funding, are they willing accept other cuts (or dig deeper in their own pockets) to make that happen?

That's what the planning process is about, a series of decisions weighing community revenues, necessities and desires. A dose of reality has been added to the mix in the current deliberations.

Current reality is that tax revenues will not allow municipal officials to advance all projects they find desirable. As with many businesses, this is not without a silver lining. Tougher times require better thinking, improved management, a more frugal disposition. The city deliberations reflect this new attitude.