Several years ago, when I was first on council, one of the separate taxes in the tax bill was called the Debt Elimination Levy. Its purpose was just as it said - to eliminate outstanding city debt. That was three mayors ago.
Two mayors ago, once the debt was eliminated, the levy morphed to pay for the improvements to the Art Hauser Centre - remember Bring Back the Magic? That's the problem with those campaigns where the public is asked to pledge money - while the money is being collected, which is some cases happens over years, the work is started, and somebody has to pay. Of course, that somebody is the city, being used like a credit card so that we can buy now and pay later.
Then came another mayor, and the soccer centre. Before the Art Hauser payments were complete, the purpose of the levy was changed again, this time to pay the construction costs for the soccer centre. At least at this point, 2008, I convinced the other members of council that the levy should be identified as such, so that it appears on your tax notice as Capital Projects - Fieldhouse and Wellness Centre. Again, it was like a loan, so that those members of the public who had pledged money could take years to pay it off, but in the meantime, the facility would be built.
And now we come to today, and another mayor. And apparently, the construction of the soccer centre is now completely paid for. And yet, the levy lingers on - although not at council's direction. Apparently, we're just continuing to collect the money, without identifying why.
I'm quite surprised at the lack of information surrounding the use of this money. Administration has not been able to tell me exactly when the levy changed from being for the soccer centre to just being for Capital Projects. Nor do they seem to know how much of the project ended up actually being paid for by those who pledged money, since a proportion of those who pledge money often end up not being able to fulfil those pledges. That kind of information would be very useful, especially if we decide to go down this path of building new facilities in the future.
So that's why I made a bit of a stink about it at last week's meeting. It is not administration's job to decide the continuation of taxes - that enviable job belongs with council. It is not administration's job to decide where that money should go - that too belongs with council. It is administration's job to track the ins and outs of the money, just as with anyone's normal budget - you know what bills are due when, and you certainly know when you've finished paying off a big debt. I expect no less of administration.
The idea of setting aside money before you start a project is a sound one. I do have a bit of a concern about setting aside money without knowing why. I'm sure that it wouldn't take long before someone thought that it would be a great idea to spend $2 million on a new sprinkler system for the golf course. Or the Raiders would think that a new arena would be the best use for the money. Or the swim club would think that an Olympic-sized pool was just what the city needed. You get the idea - when there's a pool of money sitting there, it's really tempting to use it for whatever the interest may be, even if it isn't the best thing for the whole city.
Although we have no end of interest groups telling us what the city needs, I think that if you asked the average tax payer what they think we need, they might start by saying "Lower taxes." They might think that spending on needs first would be a great idea - how about if, before we invest in another recreational facility, we think about setting a goal to have all city streets paved, and all lead service water connections replaced. How about we continue catching up on the basic infrastructure backlog that we got ourselves into, partly by building new facilities that can't support themselves.
In any event, let's not start taking tax payers' money at a certain level just because we've gotten into the habit. That's not in line with all the nice words that we've been saying about transparency. Let's be more open about the money coming in, and the money going out. And before we make any major decisions about spending money on new facilities that only serve a portion of the population, let's ask the people who are going to pay for it if they think that it's a good idea.
"There is no such thing as a good tax." - Winston Churchill