Government agencies nationwide are trying to find ways to save money as fuel costs continue to rise and Rapid City isn't the exception.

Early this week, Rapid City Alderman Bob Hurlburt made a proposal at the public works committee meeting to implement a four-day workweek for city employees. Hurlburt said the number of days city services would be offered wouldn't decrease.

In this case, saving money just isn't worth the cost.

Shortening the workweek isn't unprecedented. We know some businesses engage in the practice that gives employees some flexibility and also savings at the pump. Some school districts, too, have moved to four-day weeks to save transportation costs and the cost of lighting buildings.

And nationwide, there is discussion of four-day workweeks for state offices. In some instances, employees are on four-day weeks and, in more extreme cases, state offices are simply closed one day each week. The savings are clear; but what isn't clear is if the public is properly served.

Energy costs need to be addressed and we're glad to see the city doing just that. Considering the miles city vehicles put on each year, costs can be high and affect the taxpayer who is already burdened with energy costs.

Still, we hope the city steers clear of this four-day week thinking. We don't know how services wouldn't be affected if city employees worked longer days and shorter weeks.

Decreasing city staff can only lead to an inconvenience for the public that shouldn't have to make special trips or plan special times to get city services.

Considering city employees are there to serve the people in the city, they should be there five days a week, fully staffed, during regular operating hours.

If the intent of a shorter week is to save the city money, we don't see it. If the intent is to save employees money, the suggestion is unfair to the taxpaying public.

While we're glad there's a discussion about saving the city money (and it's expected to continue as the city starts work on its 2009 budget), we hope this idea doesn't have legs.

If a four-day week is being considered, the council needs to decide if the costs are worth the savings. We don't think so.