Stephen Vance, Editor
With the massive study into the services delivered by the municipality set to begin in less than two months, residents might want to brace themselves for a reality check.
Many residents have been calling for such a review for years, in large part based on the belief that the municipality is over-staffed, causing Meaford ratepayers to be over-taxed.
In response to the suggestion that Meaford needs to cut costs, we’ve often heard councillors as well as municipal management ask, “Which services would you like to reduce or eliminate?”
Nobody seems to like that question as it typically goes unanswered.
We see this at all levels of government. The blanket notion is that government needs to cut costs and by extension reduce taxes, but rarely is that notion accompanied by a thoughtful, reasoned suggestion about which services we are willing to do without in order to realize cost savings. This major study will at the very least provide some hard data along with public opinion about the services provided by the municipality, their costs, and the number of people who actually use a given service.
Over the seven years I’ve been covering Meaford council the call for such a review has grown louder and louder, and over the next 12 to 15 months, that call will be answered, but are people going to like the answers?
With her reminder to council on March 7 that some might find themselves surprised about which services a municipality is required to provide versus those services that are optional, Meaford’s CAO is already hinting that some might not like the findings that will come out of this study.
The public consultation will be crucial for this process, and the more members of the public who choose to share their opinions the better, lest cost become the only factor considered.
Community centres, hockey arenas, swimming pools – these aren’t mandatory services, yet they are provided by the municipality. If cost alone is considered, I suspect that virtually any small-sized municipality would eliminate such services as they are extremely costly, and it is rare for such services to recover their costs from user fees, but what would our community look like without those costly services?
Similarly, a municipality like Meaford wouldn’t necessarily be required to provide cultural services and programs, community grants, support for festivals and events, and so on.
Obviously things like policing, infrastructure management, road maintenance, and garbage collection are services required in any municipality, but for many services a case will have to be made for them to continue as municipal services.
For many, cutting what are considered frills would be a huge victory, but sometimes cutting ‘frills’ can have unintended consequences. Much is made about the need to generate economic development in this town, but how is that need furthered if we decide to carve those perceived ‘frills’ from the municipal budget? How appealing would a bare-bones community be to potential investors in the community?
It’s quite possible that some services that aren’t mandatory won’t be cut, but instead may see significant increases in user fees in order to make them more viable, and that no doubt will open another can of worms.
It’s a fine line to try to navigate, and the job is further muddied by the simple fact that a ‘frill’ to one person might be seen as a crucial piece of the community puzzle to another.
Without doubt there are services that I would be quite happy to see eliminated, but I know that those services are important to others.
I have no use for an arena, but I do enjoy shows at Meaford Hall, and I’ve got no use for boat slips at the harbour, however I like the view from the Irish Mountain lookout. My life wouldn’t personally be impacted if those services were no longer offered by the municipality, but I wouldn’t want to see this community lose the arena or boat slips at the harbour as they are part of what helps to make this community interesting and vibrant, if nothing else.
I don’t envy council or municipal staff as they embark on this journey – I’m sure there will be some feisty debates in the coming months – and that I think is healthy. With any luck the end result will be some sort of common ground, and possibly some potential areas to cut costs and save money – but again, public participation will be crucial.
In our article about the upcoming service delivery review, we’ve included a list of ten questions that will be considered when reviewing each and every municipal service. They are thoughtful, reasonable questions. Those who fear they might lose a municipal service that is important to them would be wise to reflect on those questions and then to participate in the surveys and public engagement sessions, if only to have a fuller understanding of the financial realities and the public sentiment as it pertains to services important to you, but more hopefully to have your voice heard and to possibly help guide the end result.
