Rec cuts looming? Council discusses some hard planning choices

Would you be willing to cut back on recreation services in Rossland to make sure that our roads, water and sewer systems were up to date and in working order? If you had a finite amount of money to work with and had to choose between funding one item or another in the operation of the city where would you draw the line?

These are but two of many difficult questions city staff and councillors have to work through in coming up with the city’s budget and taxation rates each year. Before adopting taxation for the year legislation requires that the city must compile a five year financial plan. The financial plan itself is a forward looking document that has been converted into dollars outlining the direction of the city in terms of expenditures proposed and revenues expected. Despite popular belief, the financial plan does not set taxation in stone but rather outlines an expected trend of taxation and, as its primary focus, proposes a level of taxation, fees and charges needed to carryout planned projects within the five year time horizon.

At this week’s Committee of the Whole (COW) meeting, council went through the plan in depth, outlining any issues they had and making suggestions for improvement. They also passed several motions for recommendations on the plan to be voted on at the next regular council meeting on March 8th.

The five year financial plan package is available on the city council’s website or at city hall for the public to peruse. This plan is the first for new CAO Victor Kumar, and by all accounts the new format of presenting the plan was well received by council.

“I applaud city staff in preparing for this meeting,” said Councillor Andy Stradling.“The presentation of this plan provides information above and beyond what I think council and the public has seen before. A lot of the issues that the public is interested in with respect to roads and what we’re paying for services have been addressed in an easy-to-read manner.”

Over the course of a three hour meeting, the committee went through the recommendations put forth by city staff, with Councillor Laurie Charlton often getting into great detail. Several times the CAO cautioned the councillors to bring the meeting back on track as “we are now discussing accounting principles it seems rather than the financial plan at hand.”

The most contentious issue of the night came up around recreation as a possible area for cuts. Councillors Stradling and Charlton were largely in agreement on the issue and advised council that there may be the need for some difficult choices and perhaps service cuts ahead in order to keep the basic functions of the city operating.

Stradling led the charge in looking for areas of the budget to cut while at the same time directing more money to the looming infrastructure debt. Based on his own analysis of the budget in concert with the survey of residents the city carried out last year, he saw recreation as the most likely place to make a suggested cut of 10%. This year Rossland will not have a recreation manager, and the financial plan suggests filling that gap with two part-time employees. This format is similar to how Rossland operated in the past before bringing a recreation manager on board last year. Stradling hoped that in cutting the managerial position there would be some savings in that department which were not apparent in the plan.

The notion of cutting recreation by 10% raised the eyebrows of other councillors at the table as well as the CAO.

“This is not a good motion for staff,” noted Kumar.” It is possible for us to cut recreation by 10%. Anything is possible. If you tell me to cut recreation by 10% I can do that, but I will go out and say, okay, we cut services here, close facilities there and we achieve 10% savings'. We will simply shut things down to achieve that 10% savings.”

In a back and forth exchange, Stradling expressed disappointment with that response as he sees an opportunity to find efficiencies rather than simply cutting services. Councillor Kathy Wallace suggested a pro-active approach to that scenario: “I would prefer that council puts the directive to increase the revenue from the service in any way we could. In my mind, just grabbing 10% out of the air, I have the same concern. If we reduce the service significantly, we will hear complaints. This community loves their recreation. I would rather see a more positive motion made to staff. In whatever way, go out and increase revenues by 10%. To say reduce it, I believe, is a dangerous motion.”

Stradling mentioned numerous times that he does not favour cutting services but rather being more efficient and that he feels it is time for some hard decisions by council. “I think this council is struggling with how to put its precious monies to work in the most efficacious manner possible. Decisions about where to invest that precious money are very difficult, and I think at the moment this council is struggling with not wanting to be the axe-man in those departments.”

Charlton echoed that sentiment, adding, “We have to recognize that we are at the point where we are going to need to cut services if we want the monies available to put into what I refer to as 'pipes and pavement' or the basics of keeping the city functional and safe. In the past we had a bit of luxury, affording a few extras, but I think we’re all recognizing and hearing about the infrastructure deficit plaguing municipalities.”

Ultimately, council recommended the five year plan as it stood with a few minor alterations. According to City Finance Manger Deb Timm, the plan is, for the most part, a duplication of last year’s: “There’s no major changes. It’s pretty well staying the same with nothing big in or out.”

Council will vote on whether or not to adopt the recommendations from this meeting at the next regular council meeting on March 8th. Following that, council will draft the 2010 property taxation bylaw. Further public information sessions on this process will be held at a currently-unscheduled date in late March or Early April to present property taxation options before council adopts the bylaw