My solution to insolvency is to increase revenue by encouraging private investment. This means sending out a twofold message: on one hand, that we are not going to get so desperate for anyone to do something that we will make deals with developers that break every rule in our zoning code. But on the other hand, that we will remove over-reaching regulations (i.e. those that do not affect health and safety) in order to incubate and grow businesses and try to meet the demand for more affordable housing. In our town, a good start to allow the "next increment" of housing would be updating our restrictive ADU regulations and permitting duplexes in areas zoned "low density residential" around our city center.

How is improving your town’s fiscal strength like improving your cycling performance?

To see improvements in cycling, a rider needs to increase their power to weight ratio. More power would be comparable to increasing revenue, and cutting weight would be like lowering expenses. To be financially strong, a city needs to increase their revenue to expenses ratio.

For all but the most elite of athletes, riders can probably figure out how to drop a few pounds. This could be easy, like emptying unnecessary items from a bike bag. Or it might be a bit painful, like forgoing dessert to lose a pound or two of excess stored energy. And I doubt any city is so well run that there is nothing that can be done to reduce expenses. Some of these measures might be low impact—like buying new vehicles for the city less often—and some might be a bit more difficult, like trimming arts and recreation budgets.

But a bike rider has to be careful not to cut weight in ways that will negatively affect performance. Not bringing water along will reduce the weight of the bike, but it would be foolish because dehydration isn’t going to do you any favors. Depriving oneself of calories to the extent that the body begins to break down muscle for fuel will lead to a lighter rider, but generally a weaker one. Reductions to city budgets shouldn't diminish returns. Letting go of public works department workers may save money, but if businesses relocate because their surroundings are neglected, the city will lose more in revenues than it gained by reducing salaries. It would also be counterproductive to de-fund cultural events that are bringing in more than they are costing the city to sponsor.

To improve power-to-weight and revenue-to-expenses, it is critical to look at both sides of the ratios. Cutting weight has to be done thoughtfully—and even then, its effects are limited. It’s often more beneficial to increase your power. Similarly, even if done flawlessly, improvements to city balance sheets will be marginal if we succeed in lowering costs but not in raising revenues.