To the editor: According to press accounts a recent town hall meeting of the mayor and council was “packed” with municipal employees who were energized about possible job cuts as the town budget is now being considered. Having paid taxes in West Milford for some 25 years, and having worked in private industry for 35, I find it frustrating in the extreme that some council members are having so much difficulty determining whether or not to cut jobs. In private industry it’s simple: If the job does not add value you cut it. You don’t have to read tea leaves or be a rocket scientist to figure it out. Again, according to press reports, the council seems to be thinking only in the paradigm of holding the average tax increase to $100. Why not venture outside the box and consider no increase or, how about a reduction? Sound crazy? Well, again, according to press reports, there is a possibility to use “surplus” money to avoid (postpone?) layoffs. Also, some council members are apparently favor a plan to retain staff and make saving “elsewhere.” Surplus? Elsewhere? Sound crazy? Do we retain staff or make cuts elsewhere? Do we retain staff and pay for it with a surplus or make cuts? These are false choices. In any business you would cut the jobs and make the cuts elsewhere and refund any surplus back to the shareholders (or, in this case, taxpayers in the form of reduced taxes). You don’t have to be a political scientist to figure this one out. Municipal workers and their families generally live in the town they are employed by, and unlike most taxpayers they pay close attention to the goings-on at town hall and most importantly, they all vote religiously. They can pack town hall before you can say “job cuts.: This does not go unnoticed by council members. On the other hand, the average taxpayer, whose job, wages, pension, health benefits and vacation days (if he or she even has them) can all be cut or eliminated in a heartbeat. The average taxpayer works 10 - 12 hours a day in between his daily commute and doesn’t have the network or the time or the energy to pack town hall. This, too, does not go unnoticed by council members. Some have likened making the job cuts to treating our employees not as people but as “shovels in sheds.” Not so. Admittedly, it is often difficult to operate government like a business. Nevertheless, if a job no longer adds real value, then taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize it. This is a microcosm of why it is so difficult to tame, control and reduce the cost of government: federal, state and local in the face of their well organized employees with a special interest in job security. Jim Teague West Milford