Any time council proposes doing things differently, we're guaranteed to get emails or phone calls from residents or other interested parties about how we shouldn't make changes, because the change will cost more. The most recent example is our decision to move to monthly water billing in January 2014, rather than the current quarterly billing. The immediate reaction from some has been that our costs for the actual billing will now be triple, and certainly, for paper billing, mailing a bill every month rather than quarterly will cost three times as much.
Any time change happens, there is a cost involved. What has to be part of the decision-making process, is an assessment of what benefits are associated with the change, and whether those benefits outweigh the costs. In the case of monthly water billing, I think that the benefits of making it easier for residents to pay water bills, the reduced risk of delinquency of payment because we'll know monthly if if someone isn't paying, and the reduced risk of a leak going unnoticed are all big benefits that have to be part of the analysis.
We also need to see if there are ways of lessening the increased billing cost. I'm not sure if administration has investigated the option of electronic billing, as provincial utilities now have available, but I think that's something that we should look into. I also think that we need to figure out a way of encouraging more people to submit their meter readings electronically - what sort of incentives might increase the proportion of residents who voluntarily do this for us, reducing the need, and the cost, of having city employees read all the meters.
Now, those are just some simple examples of the sort of analysis that needs to be done any time we propose change. Too often, I think that change is proposed because there is new technology available, and we want to try it out. As an example, our move to I-pads a couple of years ago for meeting agendas and emails has not been totally smooth, and there's still a fair amount of paper that has to be put together related to meetings. Emails sometimes disappear before they've been read, and I know that some councillors are concerned about email being accessible to administration, losing a sense of confidentiality that we had when we each had our own email on our own systems. But none of these issues was discussed fully before the change was implemented.
We need to have as much information as possible, and we need to discuss openly all the pros and cons about any changes that we're thinking about. It's just as important to think of all the potential problems ahead of time, and how we can resolve or avoid them, as it is to think of all the wonderful things that will happen with a change. And each councillor needs to honestly look at both sides of the issue, no matter which way they lean, to ensure that these discussions happen.
Very few things in life, or at council, are purely black or white. Weighing the costs and benefits takes time, but it also allows us to find the appropriate shade of grey that we can defend, and explain to our constituents. I've found that most people, when you give them the complete picture, and the steps that were taken in making the decision, are appreciative of the effort that was taken. They might have made a different decision, but most will also respect the fact that our job, as members of council, is to make those decisions to the best of our ability. And then we move on to the next decision.
"If you are not willing to risk the unusual, you will have to settle for the ordinary." - Jim Rohn
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Saturday, May 4, 2013
A Couple of Water-Related Issues
Considering the high waters that have been making headlines lately, it's rather topical that water was also part of a couple of agenda items at last Monday's council meeting. Both are issues that I've raised in the past, and finally other members of council are starting to seriously consider and debate the options.
The first one is to account for the utilities costs (water, sewage, garbage collection, recycling) for all city facilities. I've been making this suggestion for years, because our user fees are based on such fees covering a percentage of the costs of those facilities (generally 40 - 50%), and if you don't include utility costs when figuring these out, the result is that the user fees are based on a lower than actual cost. So who picks up the rest of the cost? The taxpayer of course.
I'm not sure why this inequity has been allowed to continue, but at least now, we'll know what the real costs are. Whether we adjust user fees will be another decision to be made once we have that information. Considering the increases in water rates that have been necessary this year, I think that this additional information will be useful for making future increases a bit more fair.
The second is the decision to start billing for water on a monthly, rather than a quarterly basis, starting in 2014. I think that the arguments for this outweigh the additional costs. Quarterly billing will be easier for families to plan and budget for. In an extremely unscientific poll, when I asked other members of council when their next water bill was due, not one could answer. Neither could I (although when I asked Andrea, she knew). So if, for example, your water bill is lost in the mail, you're unlikely to realize it until you get the overdue notice. If it comes monthly, you'll notice its absence.
For many families, paying one-third of the current bill on a monthly basis will be easier to manage as well. Currently, our family's water bill is in the $210 range - setting aside $70 every month sounds easier, even though it will add up to the same thing. And I would hope that, at some point, we'll be able to implement equalized billing, just like SaskPower and SaskEnergy do. And to help reduce our costs, I'm hoping that the city can make the move to electronic billing, just like the provincial utilities are encouraging people to do.
With monthly billing, we'll also be able to follow up on non-payment of bills more quickly, and be able to note problems, like unusually high bills which may indicate a leak somewhere, more quickly.
Water is one of those city services that isn't very glamourous, but that affects everyone. I hope with these two changes, we're moving to more equitable, and more affordable, provision of this necessity of life.
"Thousands have lived without love, but not one without water." - W.H. Auden
The first one is to account for the utilities costs (water, sewage, garbage collection, recycling) for all city facilities. I've been making this suggestion for years, because our user fees are based on such fees covering a percentage of the costs of those facilities (generally 40 - 50%), and if you don't include utility costs when figuring these out, the result is that the user fees are based on a lower than actual cost. So who picks up the rest of the cost? The taxpayer of course.
I'm not sure why this inequity has been allowed to continue, but at least now, we'll know what the real costs are. Whether we adjust user fees will be another decision to be made once we have that information. Considering the increases in water rates that have been necessary this year, I think that this additional information will be useful for making future increases a bit more fair.
The second is the decision to start billing for water on a monthly, rather than a quarterly basis, starting in 2014. I think that the arguments for this outweigh the additional costs. Quarterly billing will be easier for families to plan and budget for. In an extremely unscientific poll, when I asked other members of council when their next water bill was due, not one could answer. Neither could I (although when I asked Andrea, she knew). So if, for example, your water bill is lost in the mail, you're unlikely to realize it until you get the overdue notice. If it comes monthly, you'll notice its absence.
For many families, paying one-third of the current bill on a monthly basis will be easier to manage as well. Currently, our family's water bill is in the $210 range - setting aside $70 every month sounds easier, even though it will add up to the same thing. And I would hope that, at some point, we'll be able to implement equalized billing, just like SaskPower and SaskEnergy do. And to help reduce our costs, I'm hoping that the city can make the move to electronic billing, just like the provincial utilities are encouraging people to do.
With monthly billing, we'll also be able to follow up on non-payment of bills more quickly, and be able to note problems, like unusually high bills which may indicate a leak somewhere, more quickly.
Water is one of those city services that isn't very glamourous, but that affects everyone. I hope with these two changes, we're moving to more equitable, and more affordable, provision of this necessity of life.
"Thousands have lived without love, but not one without water." - W.H. Auden
Sunday, April 28, 2013
A Week in the Life of a Councillor
For a bit of a change of pace this week, I thought that I would give an overview of the work that I did last week as a member of council. It was a pretty typical week since this new council began, and you may be surprised at the number of meetings involved, and the range of topics covered.
Mondays are always busy. We had a management committee meeting in the morning (the mayor, Councillor Cody, and I) where we review various upcoming items and determine their disposition, acting as a sort of first filter of council. There was a general meeting with the Health Region, followed by Committee of the Whole and Executive, the regular meetings on non-Council meeting weeks.
Tuesday there was an Arts Board meeting - Councillor Miller and I have now been named as council representatives to the Arts Board, so that will be something that is new to both of us.
Wednesday the mayor, the city manager, and I met with Sask Housing, which I was asked to attend as a former chair of the housing committee. Next came a meeting with PA Community Housing, which have proposed a new building in Ward 3, which they wanted to discuss. And finally that day, the management committee met with the soccer association to discuss their agreement with the soccer centre.
Thursday the job was more social in nature - I brought greetings on behalf of the city to the annual general meeting of the Cancer Society. This worked out well, as Andrea's Relay for Life team, the Studs and Peelers, has been asked to be the Honourary Chair for this year's Relay in June, so we were able to attend together, along with three other members of the team. As this is something that has affected our family in many ways, it was an honour to attend on behalf of my council colleagues.
Friday evening was another opportunity to bring greetings - this time to the provincial meeting of TOPS groups from all over the province. One thing that I've found consistently in this whole business of bringing greetings from mayor and council - the groups that are gathered are always appreciative of the effort that is made, whichever one of us shows up, and I always feel very welcomed.
Weekends are usually spent reviewing the agenda for next week, preparing this blog, and touring about to check on various locations that might have been identified as having issues. I find that it's always helpful to see the actual problems on site, before raising them with staff or at council.
And of course, any day of the week I can expect phone calls from residents. This week's calls included concerns about the potential effect of the city stopping leaf pick up, blocked catch basins, snow pushed up onto a boulevard, as well as an inquiry about the process to be followed for booking the river bank for an event. I think that people often turn to their councillor with such questions and concerns, as we probably have a better idea of who to contact and where to start than the average resident. And it's a part of the job that I enjoy - directly helping people.
So that was my week - or at least the city councillor part of it. In between, I also finally risked taking the snow tires off the family vehicles, filed our income tax returns, went out for coffee a few times, and enjoyed the first beer of the season on our deck yesterday afternoon.
Here's hoping the warm weather lasts, the snow disappears without causing too much flooding, and council continues to function as well as it has been.
"If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be meetings." - Dave Barry
Mondays are always busy. We had a management committee meeting in the morning (the mayor, Councillor Cody, and I) where we review various upcoming items and determine their disposition, acting as a sort of first filter of council. There was a general meeting with the Health Region, followed by Committee of the Whole and Executive, the regular meetings on non-Council meeting weeks.
Tuesday there was an Arts Board meeting - Councillor Miller and I have now been named as council representatives to the Arts Board, so that will be something that is new to both of us.
Wednesday the mayor, the city manager, and I met with Sask Housing, which I was asked to attend as a former chair of the housing committee. Next came a meeting with PA Community Housing, which have proposed a new building in Ward 3, which they wanted to discuss. And finally that day, the management committee met with the soccer association to discuss their agreement with the soccer centre.
Thursday the job was more social in nature - I brought greetings on behalf of the city to the annual general meeting of the Cancer Society. This worked out well, as Andrea's Relay for Life team, the Studs and Peelers, has been asked to be the Honourary Chair for this year's Relay in June, so we were able to attend together, along with three other members of the team. As this is something that has affected our family in many ways, it was an honour to attend on behalf of my council colleagues.
Friday evening was another opportunity to bring greetings - this time to the provincial meeting of TOPS groups from all over the province. One thing that I've found consistently in this whole business of bringing greetings from mayor and council - the groups that are gathered are always appreciative of the effort that is made, whichever one of us shows up, and I always feel very welcomed.
Weekends are usually spent reviewing the agenda for next week, preparing this blog, and touring about to check on various locations that might have been identified as having issues. I find that it's always helpful to see the actual problems on site, before raising them with staff or at council.
And of course, any day of the week I can expect phone calls from residents. This week's calls included concerns about the potential effect of the city stopping leaf pick up, blocked catch basins, snow pushed up onto a boulevard, as well as an inquiry about the process to be followed for booking the river bank for an event. I think that people often turn to their councillor with such questions and concerns, as we probably have a better idea of who to contact and where to start than the average resident. And it's a part of the job that I enjoy - directly helping people.
So that was my week - or at least the city councillor part of it. In between, I also finally risked taking the snow tires off the family vehicles, filed our income tax returns, went out for coffee a few times, and enjoyed the first beer of the season on our deck yesterday afternoon.
Here's hoping the warm weather lasts, the snow disappears without causing too much flooding, and council continues to function as well as it has been.
"If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be meetings." - Dave Barry
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Why This Flat Tax Is Appropriate (in my opinion)
Flat taxes are not fair. For someone living in a home with a lower assessed value, the proposed $189 flat tax will be a higher proportional tax increase than for someone in a home with a higher assessed value. If your current tax bill is $1000, it represents an almost 20% increase. If your current tax bill is $4000, it represents only 5%.
I represent an area where the assessments tend to be lower, with a fairly high percentage of seniors on fixed incomes, and I have consistently opposed the imposition of flat taxes because of their inherent unfairness. Currently there are two - a $27 tax that is directed to the reconstruction of Pineview Terrace, and a $60 flat tax that was imposed a few years ago, which was supposed to be set aside for special infrastructure projects, but in its first year was used to balance the budget.
So why do I support this new proposed flat tax? Mainly, it's because our situation with road maintenance and repair has reached crisis proportions, after six years of underfunding, starting when $2 million was taken directly out of the roads budget and directed towards the Neat and Clean project. Neat and Clean money, as I'm sure you'll recall, was invested in such things as new furniture for the mayor's office and council chambers, new carpeting in City Hall, and painting lamp posts on Central Avenue as high as the painters could reach. We now have to deal with the results of this neglect and mis-spending, compounded over six years, and made worse because those problems that weren't addressed over these six years are now more expensive to remedy.
The new flat tax will be put into a dedicated fund, solely directed to road maintenance and repair. All proposed roadwork expenditures have been removed from the general budget, and will be covered from this fund. We expect to collect $4 million this year; any money not spent this year will be retained for next year. If it turns out that it's more than can be spent in a single year, the amount can be adjusted each year to ensure that the amount collected matches what can reasonably be expected to be spent in that year.
The other reason that I support this tax is because roads are used by all Prince Albert citizens - we will all benefit. We do need to identify the roads that will be covered under this years budget, and ensure that true need sets priority, to deal with the worst roads first. This work also needs to be coordinated with utility work - nobody wants to see a road resurfaced one year, then taken apart the next year for water main replacement.
The Pineview Terrace tax is scheduled to expire in a couple of years, as is the assessment for the soccer centre, although that is based on mill rate, not a flat tax. When those are finished, council will have a few more options - either redirecting those funds, or eliminating them from the tax bill, which might provide a bit of tax relief.
I do think that the current flat tax of $60 should be removed, and put on to the mill rate. This tax, as I mentioned earlier, wasn't directed toward a specific purpose, and I think that the only way to justify a flat tax is to be able to point at the specific reason for it. I will be making such a motion at Monday's council meeting.
I'm not happy about the flat tax, but I'm supporting it because I think it is the only way to get out of the mess that previous councils have gotten us into. I hope that we remember this lesson, and don't saddle future councils with such problems.
"Desperate times call for desperate measures." - Proverb
I represent an area where the assessments tend to be lower, with a fairly high percentage of seniors on fixed incomes, and I have consistently opposed the imposition of flat taxes because of their inherent unfairness. Currently there are two - a $27 tax that is directed to the reconstruction of Pineview Terrace, and a $60 flat tax that was imposed a few years ago, which was supposed to be set aside for special infrastructure projects, but in its first year was used to balance the budget.
So why do I support this new proposed flat tax? Mainly, it's because our situation with road maintenance and repair has reached crisis proportions, after six years of underfunding, starting when $2 million was taken directly out of the roads budget and directed towards the Neat and Clean project. Neat and Clean money, as I'm sure you'll recall, was invested in such things as new furniture for the mayor's office and council chambers, new carpeting in City Hall, and painting lamp posts on Central Avenue as high as the painters could reach. We now have to deal with the results of this neglect and mis-spending, compounded over six years, and made worse because those problems that weren't addressed over these six years are now more expensive to remedy.
The new flat tax will be put into a dedicated fund, solely directed to road maintenance and repair. All proposed roadwork expenditures have been removed from the general budget, and will be covered from this fund. We expect to collect $4 million this year; any money not spent this year will be retained for next year. If it turns out that it's more than can be spent in a single year, the amount can be adjusted each year to ensure that the amount collected matches what can reasonably be expected to be spent in that year.
The other reason that I support this tax is because roads are used by all Prince Albert citizens - we will all benefit. We do need to identify the roads that will be covered under this years budget, and ensure that true need sets priority, to deal with the worst roads first. This work also needs to be coordinated with utility work - nobody wants to see a road resurfaced one year, then taken apart the next year for water main replacement.
The Pineview Terrace tax is scheduled to expire in a couple of years, as is the assessment for the soccer centre, although that is based on mill rate, not a flat tax. When those are finished, council will have a few more options - either redirecting those funds, or eliminating them from the tax bill, which might provide a bit of tax relief.
I do think that the current flat tax of $60 should be removed, and put on to the mill rate. This tax, as I mentioned earlier, wasn't directed toward a specific purpose, and I think that the only way to justify a flat tax is to be able to point at the specific reason for it. I will be making such a motion at Monday's council meeting.
I'm not happy about the flat tax, but I'm supporting it because I think it is the only way to get out of the mess that previous councils have gotten us into. I hope that we remember this lesson, and don't saddle future councils with such problems.
"Desperate times call for desperate measures." - Proverb
Sunday, April 7, 2013
A Different Way of Doing Things
If I were to describe the atmosphere around council meetings these days, I would use words like respectful, conciliatory, open, listening. I get the sense that those of us around the table are aware that we each have good ideas to contribute, and that when we openly discuss issues, we can use these ideas to develop far better solutions than any one of us could come up with alone.
A good example of this is the recent decision that we made surrounding expenditures for floral decorations. Once the subject was raised, it turned out that we were all in agreement that the status quo wasn't achieving results in line with the size of the expenditure, and the voicing of opinions saying so wasn't squelched, but was instead encouraged. We then tossed around ideas for how we could continue beautification efforts, while not spending so much money.
While we'll still have a budget line for flowers, it will be for purchasing materials, and the labour will be internal. We'll also be looking at such things as volunteer work and sponsorship. And we'll be looking at what works, and what doesn't, when we develop next year's budget. It's amazing what can happen when we step out of the comfort zone of just doing what we've been doing, and instead look at what we want to achieve, and the different ways of achieving that goal.
Some might suggest that this willingness to compromise somehow indicates weakness of purpose. I think that it demonstrates our recognition of the strength of diversity, which is the reason behind having a council of nine individuals. We're different, and we need to use these differences when we're discussing issues and coming up with solutions.
We need to take this approach with every item in the budget. Just because we've always spent money on certain things, or always done things in a certain way, doesn't mean that it's been the best or the only way of achieving results. This approach takes more effort, and it takes more time, but the positive results show in more than just financial ways.
A council where all members feel that their contributions are welcome, that asking questions about possible options is not discouraged, that new ideas will be seriously considered - that's a council that's going to be able to make effective change, and that means that everyone, council, administration and residents, is going to benefit. I'm not promising that we'll be able to solve all our problems, but I do think that things are getting better.
"Compromise is the best and cheapest lawyer." - Robert Louis Stevenson
A good example of this is the recent decision that we made surrounding expenditures for floral decorations. Once the subject was raised, it turned out that we were all in agreement that the status quo wasn't achieving results in line with the size of the expenditure, and the voicing of opinions saying so wasn't squelched, but was instead encouraged. We then tossed around ideas for how we could continue beautification efforts, while not spending so much money.
While we'll still have a budget line for flowers, it will be for purchasing materials, and the labour will be internal. We'll also be looking at such things as volunteer work and sponsorship. And we'll be looking at what works, and what doesn't, when we develop next year's budget. It's amazing what can happen when we step out of the comfort zone of just doing what we've been doing, and instead look at what we want to achieve, and the different ways of achieving that goal.
Some might suggest that this willingness to compromise somehow indicates weakness of purpose. I think that it demonstrates our recognition of the strength of diversity, which is the reason behind having a council of nine individuals. We're different, and we need to use these differences when we're discussing issues and coming up with solutions.
We need to take this approach with every item in the budget. Just because we've always spent money on certain things, or always done things in a certain way, doesn't mean that it's been the best or the only way of achieving results. This approach takes more effort, and it takes more time, but the positive results show in more than just financial ways.
A council where all members feel that their contributions are welcome, that asking questions about possible options is not discouraged, that new ideas will be seriously considered - that's a council that's going to be able to make effective change, and that means that everyone, council, administration and residents, is going to benefit. I'm not promising that we'll be able to solve all our problems, but I do think that things are getting better.
"Compromise is the best and cheapest lawyer." - Robert Louis Stevenson
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Really, I Don't Hate Flowers
At the end of our two days of budget review meetings, I asked where in the budget was the $40,000 that previous councils had allocated each year for the last six years for floral decorations. I was told that it was in the base budget – in other words, administration had assumed that past expenditures were to continue, without any kind of review, so had left it in there, while claiming that a 3.6% increase in the base budget was necessary. As I said in my previous post, this is a basic flaw in our budgeting process that we need to fix – we have to look at everywhere we’re currently spending money, and reduce where we can, as a first step in the budgeting process. The process has to include more than deciding how big the tax increase is going to be.
And then I finished by saying “I hate those flowers,” a quote that the local media was quick to pick up on.
Of course, I don’t hate flowers. What I hate is what that expenditure symbolizes to me – style over substance, image over content, wants over needs. Those often seemed to be the priorities of council for the past six years, and that’s part of the reason why we’re in such a difficult situation now, as we try to figure out a way, not just of keeping up with basic maintenance needs, but of making up for lost opportunities and higher costs due to past neglect and deferrals – of choosing style over substance.
So when the contract for floral decorations came up at Monday’s Executive Meeting, I took the opportunity to clarify my concerns. I started by saying that I’ve joined a 12-step program for flower haters, but then I made the serious pitch that we should not go forward with this contract, which isn’t even with a local company. I know that some might view the $40,000 as a pittance, but over the past six years, that single pittance has added up to $240,000 – money that could have been used for more permanent improvements or repairs. The flowers are a transient thing, lasting, at best, five months, with benefits that are impossible to quantify.
Other communities have found ways to beautify their cities without spending a heap of taxpayers’ money to do it. I understand that Moose Jaw has a voluntary program, and I’ve mentioned before the Heritage Gardener program in Andrea’s home town of North Bay, Ontario, where the entire waterfront – several kilometers of walkways and bike paths reclaimed from former rail yards – has flower beds on both sides of the paths put in and maintained by groups of volunteers, with the city only providing water connections at various points. I think that even the T-shirts provided to volunteers (my mother-in-law was one) were sponsored by an outside company. Ingrid lives in the Riversdale area of Saskatoon, and even her lower-income neighbourhood has public planters and rosebushes maintained by residents. These are the sorts of initiatives that I think could work here, but which we haven’t looked into.
It’s important to remember that there are hidden costs over and above the $40,000 as well. The contractor may have provided the materials for the barrels of petunias that were set out in military precision in front of City Hall every year, but it was city crews that had to spend time setting out the barrels every May, and removing them every September. These costs don’t appear as a line item in the budget, but it’s time that those crews could have spent elsewhere, to greater effect.
When the base budget was first posted, we were told that it was made up only of labour costs. It turns out that’s not exactly the case. There's a whole lot of stuff in the base budget beyond labour costs - snow- plowing, street sweeping, fleet vehicle maintenance, grass cutting, building operating costs are just some examples of costs that are in the base budget. These examples would be considered essential, of course, although it is up to council, not administration, to determine the level at which these things are done.
The base budget also includes more non-essentials than just the flowers. For instance, advertising costs are in there - a total of $235,000. I wouldn't propose cutting the entire advertising budget, because of course we need to advertise things like tenders, hiring opportunities and things like the election information piece that went to every residence last fall, but some things, like the infomercials on local radio that the last council paid about $70,000 annually for, aren't necessary for the city to function, and I would propose cutting those.
Also funded through the base budget are facilities such as the golf course, the soccer centre, the Art Hauser Centre and the Rawlinson Centre. Rather than just automatically funding these facilities at current levels, I don't see why we can't set targets for these facilities to reduce their budgets. After all, they're already getting free water, sanitation, advertising and floral decorations. If we expect city residents to tighten their belts so that they can pay higher taxes, we should expect no less from those who benefit from these higher taxes.
We need to change our whole attitude towards budgeting. And part of that attitude has to include the recognition that everyone involved, both council and administration, has to look at all our costs – big and small – to be able to separate the non-essentials from the essentials, the wants from the needs, the nice-to-haves from the must-haves. As I said earlier, several years of confusing these things has led to the current situation, and we need to act decisively to start to swing things the other way.
And if that means looking at the flowers as a starting point, then let’s do that.
"Where have all the flowers gone?" - Pete Seeger
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Budget Meeting Thoughts
Council spent all day Friday and Saturday, from nine in the morning until five in the afternoon both days, going through the budget line by line. We went through two thick binders of budget material - one for capital expenditures, which includes things like equipment purchases, and the other for general operating expenditures, which includes things like labour costs and contracts.
Unlike in previous years, when we would set aside two days for this work, but then rush through things in one day, taking things in chunks, we had lots of good open discussion about specific items, and there were no sacred cows in what we were reviewing. Two long days, but I think that those who have been involved before found it a better and more rewarding process.
That's not to say that the process couldn't be made better. We weren't actually reviewing the whole budget - administration had already posted the base budget, and we didn't have the opportunity to review the line items in that budget, and find ways of cutting costs there. The base budget is much more than staff wages, as I found out when I went looking in the binders for the $40,000 that we spend every year on floral decorations - that's still in the base budget, and it's an item that I think could be reduced, but it wasn't part of our discussions.
I'd also like the opportunity to go through the base budget because that's where costs like snow removal and street sweeping are. The general operations budget often speaks to adding funds to those items, but without being able to see what current costs are, it's hard to evaluate whether the proposed additional costs are reasonable.
Assuming that current expenditures will remain as they are is an assumption that we can't afford. We have to look at finding efficiencies in how and where we're currently spending, because, unfortunately, we can't afford everything on everyone's wish list. We have to be very careful to distinguish between wants and needs, something that the previous council didn't do very well.
Spending from specific reserves also needs to be scrutinized more closely. We tend to pass these without much discussion, since the money is there, in a reserve. But we can't forget that this money came from the tax payer, and needs to be spent just as wisely as the taxes that we're proposing to collect this year.
The service review that we had in early March was a good start, but unfortunately it didn't affect anything in this year's budget. I think that next year we should do the service review earlier, then use that to give administration budget direction - maybe something like reduce costs for a specific area by a certain percentage. I would also recommend against putting out preliminary numbers on what the tax increase will be. The base budget made public a few weeks ago stated that a 3.6 % tax increase would be necessary just to keep pace with wages, but it also assumed the status quo on all expenditures in the base budget, and left out the fact that council had yet to review the capital and general operating budgets.
By next year's budget, we also should have made decisions on how we will deal with all of the buildings that the city currently owns, and have utility and sanitation costs included for all departments and facilities. We will then be able to factor these costs in when setting user fees, which should reduce the burden on the tax payer. I would also suggest that all facilities should be required to establish reserve funds in their budgets, so that future capital expenditures are more manageable.
So what's next in the budget process? Administration now has the job of putting forward various options for proportional and flat tax increases, in various combinations, which will then come back to council for further discussions.
It's a long process, and particularly for those newcomers to council, I'm sure it's overwhelming at times. And the decisions are not easy. But line by line, item by item, we're doing the job that we've been elected to do - keeping that in mind makes the decisions easier.
"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it." - George W. Bush
Unlike in previous years, when we would set aside two days for this work, but then rush through things in one day, taking things in chunks, we had lots of good open discussion about specific items, and there were no sacred cows in what we were reviewing. Two long days, but I think that those who have been involved before found it a better and more rewarding process.
That's not to say that the process couldn't be made better. We weren't actually reviewing the whole budget - administration had already posted the base budget, and we didn't have the opportunity to review the line items in that budget, and find ways of cutting costs there. The base budget is much more than staff wages, as I found out when I went looking in the binders for the $40,000 that we spend every year on floral decorations - that's still in the base budget, and it's an item that I think could be reduced, but it wasn't part of our discussions.
I'd also like the opportunity to go through the base budget because that's where costs like snow removal and street sweeping are. The general operations budget often speaks to adding funds to those items, but without being able to see what current costs are, it's hard to evaluate whether the proposed additional costs are reasonable.
Assuming that current expenditures will remain as they are is an assumption that we can't afford. We have to look at finding efficiencies in how and where we're currently spending, because, unfortunately, we can't afford everything on everyone's wish list. We have to be very careful to distinguish between wants and needs, something that the previous council didn't do very well.
Spending from specific reserves also needs to be scrutinized more closely. We tend to pass these without much discussion, since the money is there, in a reserve. But we can't forget that this money came from the tax payer, and needs to be spent just as wisely as the taxes that we're proposing to collect this year.
The service review that we had in early March was a good start, but unfortunately it didn't affect anything in this year's budget. I think that next year we should do the service review earlier, then use that to give administration budget direction - maybe something like reduce costs for a specific area by a certain percentage. I would also recommend against putting out preliminary numbers on what the tax increase will be. The base budget made public a few weeks ago stated that a 3.6 % tax increase would be necessary just to keep pace with wages, but it also assumed the status quo on all expenditures in the base budget, and left out the fact that council had yet to review the capital and general operating budgets.
By next year's budget, we also should have made decisions on how we will deal with all of the buildings that the city currently owns, and have utility and sanitation costs included for all departments and facilities. We will then be able to factor these costs in when setting user fees, which should reduce the burden on the tax payer. I would also suggest that all facilities should be required to establish reserve funds in their budgets, so that future capital expenditures are more manageable.
So what's next in the budget process? Administration now has the job of putting forward various options for proportional and flat tax increases, in various combinations, which will then come back to council for further discussions.
It's a long process, and particularly for those newcomers to council, I'm sure it's overwhelming at times. And the decisions are not easy. But line by line, item by item, we're doing the job that we've been elected to do - keeping that in mind makes the decisions easier.
"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it." - George W. Bush
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
