In your May 28th issue you ran an article on the city budget written by Rebekah Schilperoort. The article seemed to indicate that the greatest concerns regarded funding for social services. On closer reading most speakers appear to be administrators of various service organizations. Of course it's perfectly understandable that this should occur. It's only natural for people to defend their own turf and these various organizations all perform highly commendable services for people in need.

Unfortunately the most important ideas don't come until the very end of the article. Councilman Nick Licata speaks of the council acting for the "common good." Council President Richard Conlin says the Council must "set priorities" and make "tough decisions." Exactly right.

Everyone will have their own perspective on how the budget should be prioritized. I would propose the following order:

- First, Public Safety (police, fire etc.)

- Second, Infrastructure

- A distant Third, Administration

The 2008 budget saw Administration (read bureaucracy) surpass Public Safety in both dollars allocated and percentage of the total budget. While Administration saw an 18 percent increase in budget allocation, Public Safety actually took a 6 percent hit. Something is radically wrong with this picture. We can only hope that the council members will follow their own advice: Act for the "common good" by making the "tough decisions" necessary to set the "right priorities."

Please invite your readers to run the numbers for themselves, the 2008 Budget is available online, go to:

seattle.gov > Adopted 2008 Budget > Introduction. If they want to skip the verbiage and get straight to the meat go to pages 11, 12 and 13.

Thomas Hope

Seattle