A couple of months ago, I joked to a colleague that I had the answer to the city’s budget woes.

Having just passed by the sinkhole that formed on Franklin Street, my friend wondered how the city was ever going to attend to all of the pothole-ridden streets in our town.

Not really knowing the answer, I responded in my usual joking fashion.

“Maybe we should just take up all of the asphalt in downtown Natchez and return to riding on dirt roads,” I quipped. “Think about it. It would be a great tourist attraction and it would require no asphalt roadwork.”

“It would be the best of both worlds. Wouldn’t it?” I asked.

For a town that values its preservation, what would be more historic than returning to the days depicted in Henry Norman’s 19th century glass negatives?

Surely maintenance would be kept to a minimum with the exceptions of repairing a mud hole or two that might develop after a downpour or watering streets to keep down the dust.

Once the word got out, I am certain many tourists would flock to our little town on the Mississippi River just to see our dirt streets.

“Instead of moving forward, we would be moving backward,” I said.

In the past few days, I have been reminded of that conversation, not because I am serious about ripping up our streets in an effort to boost tourism, but because I wonder if the city is actually moving — forward or backward — on many of the issues facing our town.

You might think that one- and two-hour aldermen meetings would give residents a clue to the priorities set by our local leaders. After all, isn’t that the point of city meetings — to communicate with residents?

To be fair, aldermen have discussed important issues like abandoned properties, overgrown lots and a vicious dog ordinance. These are quality of life issues.

Recreation seems to be a common topic, as well.

But, as one person told me this week, there is so much grandstanding at aldermen meetings that attendees leave more confused than when they came.

Words do seem to be more valuable to our city leaders than action. Whatever priorities they set are lost in the cacophony of the meetings.

Interestingly, neighboring communities hold town council meetings known for their brevity. Vidalia meetings, for an example, rarely last more than 30 minutes

Of course, it may be that such meetings don’t make for good television. After all, how would the local station schedule such a short program or what would they do with the remaining time reserved for such meetings?

It seems that city leadership has been on a pendulum over the last decade, swinging wildly from those who are accused of doing too much, like the administrations of Butch Brown and Phillip West, to those who seem to do very little, like Hank Smith’s administration.

In every case, voters expressed their dissatisfaction by voting out the incumbent administration.

My fear is that the current administration is swinging wildly once again toward inaction. After this year’s budget meetings, I came away with a sense that the only priority of the current mayor and board is to keep the status quo — which in my book is not to have any priorities.

In a time when the city is faced with serious questions about paving streets, tax anticipation loans and low salaries, isn’t it time the city clearly express to the public it priorities?

Or are the leaders hoping to keep the status quo and hoping voters like it just the way it is.

Ben Hillyer is the Web editor of The Democrat. He can be reached at 601-445-3540 or ben.hillyer@natchezdemocrat.com.