They say the original 9.5 percent plan was designed only to divert a crisis, not solve the problem. But, like in Harrisburg, it appears that the council and the mayor are poised for an ongoing battle.

Today’s political and policy narratives are monopolized by calls for the downsizing of government. It is clear that the public has no appetite for tax or rate increases and that trust in government is dangerously low. The result is a hard-line posture that cutting government spending is the only way to make things right, even when the consequences are dire.

What’s missing are cooler heads seeking balanced approaches. I do not believe that CWLP should be rewarded with a “no questions asked” rate increase that keeps business operating as usual. But neither should streetlevel workers bear the brunt of decades of bloated management, political hiring and faulty decision-making. Nor should city residents be subject to dramatic service cuts that jeopardize their safety and well-being and cause preventable future costs.

The compromise plan passed by the council has bought some time. Now the community must confront the problem with the goal of finding a balanced, rational and equitable solution. We must reject the kneejerk and narrow-minded response of one alderman who swore his allegiance to the ratepayers of Springfield and not the “bondholders in New York.” The sentiment is understandable and appealing, but policy approaches that derive from it will be dangerous and irresponsible.

Just google “Harrisburg debt” to see why.

Sheila Stocks-Smith is a special projects consultant and adjunct professor at UIS, teaching a class on public policy.