Springfield, USA. – Last week greenlit a $2 million feasibility study to investigate the root causes of municipal study costs, specifically why they so often seem to land on the $2 million price point. The unanimous vote, described by council members as “a necessary first step toward fiscal transparency,” will establish a blue-ribbon panel, hire several high-priced consultants from out of state, and fund a series of catered stakeholder symposiums to deconstruct the very concept of a municipal study. “We need to get to the bottom of this $2 million phenomenon,” said Councilman Brad Higgins, 58, who proposed the study. “Is it a matter of scope creep? Or is it simply that two million is the exact amount of money required to make a problem disappear for precisely 18 to 24 months?”
The project has already begun its work by commissioning a $250,000 preliminary report to define the parameters of the main study. Lead consultant Dr. Evelyn Reed, whose firm will receive $850,000 for her team’s analysis, explained the complexity. “You can’t just look at the $2 million figure in a vacuum,” she said. “We must account for variables like the cost of premium binders, the going rate for jargon generation, and the sheer gravitational pull that a round number like two million has on a municipal budget. It’s a delicate ecosystem.” The study will also explore why cheaper alternatives, such as simply asking a local intern to do a Google search, are consistently deemed “not rigorous enough.”
Looking ahead, the council anticipates the final report will be delivered in two years. The next phase, already being discussed, is a proposed $3.5 million study to analyze the findings of the first study and develop actionable strategies for potentially forming a committee to explore future cost-saving measures. Councilman Higgins is optimistic about the long-term benefits. “This initial investment will save taxpayers millions down the line,” he insisted, while reviewing catering options for the panel’s first meeting. “Unless, of course, the study finds that $2 million is actually too low. Then we’ll obviously have to go back to the drawing board.”