Don't single out Agency on Aging

Recently there was a statement from a candidate for county commissioner that privatizing the Agency for Aging should be considered. It bothers me that such action should be considered. 

Why should an identified function of the county government be considered suitable for privatizing? How could that be beneficial to the taxpayers who support this government function and the users of that service? If saving money for the taxpayers is the only consideration, why confine it to the Agency on Aging? If the theory that private operation will always save money, there are other county government functions that could be privatized; Road and Bridge Department, Library, Motor Vehicle Department — Why just select a few? Perhaps the entire county government should be privatized. We could save a bundle!

What are the reasons this service for the older persons was ever started in the first place? How does this service benefit the community? If there are identifiable reasons for this service, perhaps that could be considered in the equation rather than just saving money for the taxpayers. I doubt that there would be any savings to the taxpayers unless there was considerable reduction of services and quality. Many of the services provided by the Agency on Aging depend on a heavy infusion of volunteer help, which I feel would not be offered if privatized. I avail myself of the Senior Center services in Columbia Falls and have volunteered many hours and gas money delivering Meals on Wheels, as treasurer, and working in fund-raising activities. Do you really believe I would do that for a private businessperson who operates primarily to make a profit? HA HA! —Billy E. Butts, Columbia Falls