By Stephen Vance, Editor
The first draft of the 2015 municipal budget was presented to council on January 12 after councillors had been educated about asset management and budgeting by Treasurer Darcy Chapman during a special education session.
For municipal staffers and members of council, budget the budgeting process requires a lot of time, patience, and the balancing skills of a tightrope walker.
On the one hand, Meaford ratepayers are exhausted and have lighter wallets after five years of significant property tax increases, and the message from many residents during the October election campaign was that taxes must be held to the current level – if not reduced – or council will hear about it. Those expressing a desire for zero increases in the coming years aren’t joking, and there can be no denying that after the municipality found itself drowning in $3 million in accumulated deficits, Meaford ratepayers have done their part by forking over more and more of their hard earned money each year.
On the other hand, municipal staffers look at the state of Meaford’s infrastructure – particularly roads and bridges – and they know full well that we, like most municipalities, are heading for some serious infrastructure blues that will require enormous amounts of money that has to come from somewhere.
The budget presented to council on January 12 features some minimal cuts on the operating side. Nearly $20,000 has been cut from the base operating budget, and the consulting fees that can draw the ire of a ratepayer rather quickly have been reduced by $90,000 in the draft budget. Positive steps that will no doubt be lambasted as not nearly enough by the most hard core tax increase haters.
Even with those reductions, Meaford’s Treasurer says that an additional $223,000 will be required in the 2015 budget, and to generate that additional cash, a 1.8 percent increase to the municipal portion of your tax bill will be required.
As an aside, another small increase is also included in the budget that certainly filled up my in-box this week – the garbage bag tags are to increase by fifty cents to $2.50 per tag – gasp! This week I was told by many that the ditches will be filled with trash because people won’t pay the increased fee. Yes, I heard that a lot in 2009 when the $2 bag tag was introduced, and yet we didn’t see trash lining our streets – and that was a $2 per bag increase, not a $0.50 increase after six years of no increase to the cost, so relax, we’ll find a way to survive with the additional cost.
So if staff have cut costs on the operating side of the ledger, why do taxes have to be increased? For the very infrastructure issues mentioned earlier. The budget calls for an additional $125,000 for roads over what was spent in 2014, and various other capital projects and reserve funds will be the beneficiary of the rest of the extra taxes raised.
If the desires of the most vocal Meaford residents during the recent election campaign were to be summed up in a simple statement, it might go something like this – lower our taxes, cut staff, and fix our roads.
Easy to say, not so easy to implement. Fixing roads is an expensive endeavour, and given that more than half of Meaford’s roads are in sub-standard condition, if they are to be fixed without tax increases, where should the money come from? Cutting staff is often cited as the most obvious way to slash costs, and it is indeed a seemingly simple and effective way to reduce the budget, but when you realize the number of staff that would need to be cut in order to have any significant real savings more questions arise. What services are we willing to give up, or to have reduced? What programs are we willing to give up for our youth?
Should we shut down the arena? It doesn’t generate any profit and only costs taxpayers money. Perhaps we could close the museum as many have suggested. Those savings would be a whopping $100,000 or so, not even a full percentage point of the overall budget.
Finding cost savings, or limiting increases is more difficult than it seems. People seem quick to forget that their own cost of living, cost of operating their lives increases virtually every year, yet they seem to think that government costs should decrease. Municipal staffers on the other hand often lack an appreciation for how much pain can be inflicted on ratepayers with years of significant tax increases.
A 1.8 percent increase along with an extra fifty cents every couple weeks doesn’t seem like an outrageous burden to place on ratepayers, and it isn’t unless you consider the last five years. When those last five years are considered, a decent argument can be made for at least a break from increases this year so everyone can catch their breath and hold onto some cash.
But then we hop in the car and venture out onto our roads…
