This past Saturday was the ninth annual street fair. This is an event that I always look forward to, the opportunity to wander up and down Central Avenue, eat outside, enjoy the outdoor entertainment, browse the various displays, and check out what the stores have to offer.
This year I didn't have very high hopes for the event. The heavy rain on Friday, combined with the forecast for more of the same all day Saturday, had participants trying to figure out how they would manage in torrential rain. And when it was raining first thing Saturday morning, I really didn't think that anyone would bother going downtown, but would instead choose to keep dry at home. I admit that would have been my choice.
I was forced to go out though - Andrea is part of Morley Harrison's stock company for his historical vignettes, and she was committed to being part of this year's offering, "The Damned Dam", about the La Colle Falls Dam project. At their rehearsal the evening before, they had decided to perform inside the museum, to avoid any concerns about rain, so we headed there around 10:30. Since I had some time to pass before the 11 a.m. performance, I wandered up the street.
It wasn't raining at this point, and I was pleasantly surprised at the number of people on Central. Certainly not as many as would have been there had it been a sunny day, but far more than I expected to see. While the first block, where the Co-op used to be, was a dead zone, further up many of the stores had decided to participate, often putting up tents to shelter merchandise, there were plenty of food vendors, and Memorial Square, in front of City Hall, was full of kids and parents taking advantage of games and face-painting. The steps of City Hall were being used as a stage, an excellent opportunity for some young dancers to perform to an appreciative audience. I ran into so many people that wanted to talk that I was late getting back to the museum, and missed part of the play.
After Andrea changed out of her play attire, we wandered up and down, checking things out and chatting with people. Many people were carrying umbrellas, just in case, but it was obvious that a little rain wasn't going to stop them from enjoying the opportunity to do something different. I think that the street fair meets a need in the community - it's a place that people can bring their kids, and know that there will be things for them to do that don't cost anything. For adults, you're bound to run into people that you know, and catch up on things. It's a chance to slow down, see the downtown in a different light, and perhaps see some of its potential as a gathering place.
I think that there's still a lot that could be tried. If there was an Open Doors type of event, in which buildings like City Hall, the Forest Centre, and the downtown churches are open for tours, that would give people a place to duck into in the case of bad weather. Putting the historical play inside the museum turned out to have a couple of unexpected benefits - the performers were much more easily heard than is the case when they're outdoors, competing with music and conversation, and the museum had many people who came for the three performances of the play, but then stuck around to check out the displays. These kind of potential synergies need to be explored more fully.
The rain may have dampened things, and limited some of the usual events, but those who came out enjoyed themselves, had the chance to socialize, and maybe learned something new. Not a bad way to spend a Saturday.
"Everybody needs some time to rejuvenate, refresh, recharge and begin again." - Ravathi Sankarun
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Some FCM Reflections
I've just returned from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) annual general meeting, which was held this year in Vancouver. As we often do, Andrea and I went out a few days early for a bit of a vacation before the work began. Just my luck, those were the rainy days, but even in the rain, Vancouver gave us lots to see and do. It's a great city that has put a great deal of thought into keeping its development balanced with maintaining accessible green space in a very livable and vibrant downtown.
There has been some questioning in the media about the value of FCM for members of council. It is definitely not, as one letter to the editor of the paper said, a "paid vacation". I think that people often don't consider that there is no school that one can attend to learn how to be a member of city council. Our education might best be termed as self-directed learning. I've found that one of the best ways of doing that is by talking to others about their experiences, and the best venue that I've found for that is FCM. The six members of council who attended FCM spent long days and evenings taking advantage of as many educational opportunities as possible.
There are four different types of learning opportunities at FCM. There are the formal working sessions, which feature presentations on various issues, and you can select the ones most appropriate for your circumstances. For example, this year a particularly timely one for Prince Albert was on the location of cell phone tower locations, which offered solutions that have worked in other communities.
There is an enormous trade show, which has new products and ideas ranging from new voting systems to waste disposal options. It's a good place to get ideas which can then be passed along to administration for further assessment, to see how such ideas could work for Prince Albert. I saw a couple of things that might be useful for the Rotary Trail. One was using LED for public lighting - this could be an inexpensive and environmentally friendly option for providing lighting along the trail. The other was a self-cleaning public washroom, one of which is already being used in downtown Vancouver - the lack of public washroom facilities has been cited as one of the drawbacks to using the Rotary Trail.
There are study tours which offer the chance to see solutions that are actually being tried. I took one tour that focused on housing solutions for those who are difficult to house. In Vancouver, the provincial government has actually taken the lead on this problem, and owns housing that is utilized for this purpose, and the city has staff that are dedicated to implementing the solution. I think that partnerships like these are those most likely to succeed with problems like housing that stem from a range of root causes.
And finally, there are the informal learning opportunities that come from networking with councillors from cities and towns across Canada. All that we really have in common is our jobs as members of council, and that's what we talk about. It's a chance to pick people's brains about what they have done about perennial problems like crime, downtown areas, recreational developments, managing growth, or disappearing industries. For example, I had a good conversation with the mayor of Oliver, BC, whose town was devastated when the local mine closed, but which has been revitalized by the growth of the wine industry.
If we don't take advantage of the opportunities to learn how other communities do things, we'll miss the chance to learn from both their mistakes and their successes. We'll keep on doing things the way we've always done them, because we won't have learned about recent innovations. Part of doing the job well is learning how to do the job smarter and better, and conferences like FCM are a good investment in that, both for members of council, and for the city as a whole.
"The great aim of education is not knowledge, but action." - Herbert Spencer
There has been some questioning in the media about the value of FCM for members of council. It is definitely not, as one letter to the editor of the paper said, a "paid vacation". I think that people often don't consider that there is no school that one can attend to learn how to be a member of city council. Our education might best be termed as self-directed learning. I've found that one of the best ways of doing that is by talking to others about their experiences, and the best venue that I've found for that is FCM. The six members of council who attended FCM spent long days and evenings taking advantage of as many educational opportunities as possible.
There are four different types of learning opportunities at FCM. There are the formal working sessions, which feature presentations on various issues, and you can select the ones most appropriate for your circumstances. For example, this year a particularly timely one for Prince Albert was on the location of cell phone tower locations, which offered solutions that have worked in other communities.
There is an enormous trade show, which has new products and ideas ranging from new voting systems to waste disposal options. It's a good place to get ideas which can then be passed along to administration for further assessment, to see how such ideas could work for Prince Albert. I saw a couple of things that might be useful for the Rotary Trail. One was using LED for public lighting - this could be an inexpensive and environmentally friendly option for providing lighting along the trail. The other was a self-cleaning public washroom, one of which is already being used in downtown Vancouver - the lack of public washroom facilities has been cited as one of the drawbacks to using the Rotary Trail.
There are study tours which offer the chance to see solutions that are actually being tried. I took one tour that focused on housing solutions for those who are difficult to house. In Vancouver, the provincial government has actually taken the lead on this problem, and owns housing that is utilized for this purpose, and the city has staff that are dedicated to implementing the solution. I think that partnerships like these are those most likely to succeed with problems like housing that stem from a range of root causes.
And finally, there are the informal learning opportunities that come from networking with councillors from cities and towns across Canada. All that we really have in common is our jobs as members of council, and that's what we talk about. It's a chance to pick people's brains about what they have done about perennial problems like crime, downtown areas, recreational developments, managing growth, or disappearing industries. For example, I had a good conversation with the mayor of Oliver, BC, whose town was devastated when the local mine closed, but which has been revitalized by the growth of the wine industry.
If we don't take advantage of the opportunities to learn how other communities do things, we'll miss the chance to learn from both their mistakes and their successes. We'll keep on doing things the way we've always done them, because we won't have learned about recent innovations. Part of doing the job well is learning how to do the job smarter and better, and conferences like FCM are a good investment in that, both for members of council, and for the city as a whole.
"The great aim of education is not knowledge, but action." - Herbert Spencer
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Some Thoughts on the Proposed GPS Policy
There's been quite a bit of media coverage over the last couple of weeks about a policy brought forward by administration to set guidelines for the use of various technical devices that are available in city-owned property - cell phones, radios, vehicles, water meter reading devices, for example. Mostly, it speaks to the use of GPS (Global Positioning Systems) that are in such things, and how the city could use this GPS availability to track the location of city employees.
I voted against this proposal for a number of reasons. While the main reason for the policy was suggested to be for improved safety, this seems to be a bit of a stretch. Employees rarely work alone, and never in remote locations. As well, I think that it's a fair assumption that work schedules and locations are known by supervisors, managers and co-workers - if there's a problem, finding where the worker is will be the least of the problem. And a GPS won't be able to tell when there's a problem.
I was also concerned that the staff proposing this couldn't tell us of another municipality where this is in place, suggesting that either it isn't a good idea, or that full research on the idea hadn't taken place. I'm a firm believer in gathering all the information that's out there before submitting a proposal, and that groundwork hasn't yet been done. The concerns raised by the privacy commissioner the day after our meeting also seem to indicate that the proposal had missed a fairly important piece of research.
Although the proposal focused on the need for safety, many of the comments and questions since have focused on the potential of using this technology for monitoring where outside workers are, and when, and for checking on such things as length of coffee breaks. I totally disagree with this. We pay supervisors and managers good salaries, part of which are for doing the actual work of supervising and managing employees, and I believe that far better results occur from face-to-face discussions of expectations and issues of non-performance, than from electronic surveillance.
There's also an inequity here of how we treat inside and outside workers. As far as I know, we do not monitor inside employees, who may well spend time talking to co-workers, on inappropriate web-sites, or updating their Facebook pages when they should be working. Perhaps we're less concerned because the public is unlikely to see these behaviours and complain, but if we're going to set up a system for monitoring, we'd better be sure that we're treating all employees the same.
The proposed policy has been sent back for further development and consultation, particularly with the unions. Hopefully, before it shows up before us again, the research has been done to answer everyone's questions.
" There will come a time when it isn't 'They're spying on me through my phone' any more. Eventually it will be 'My phone is spying on me'." - Philip K. Dick
I voted against this proposal for a number of reasons. While the main reason for the policy was suggested to be for improved safety, this seems to be a bit of a stretch. Employees rarely work alone, and never in remote locations. As well, I think that it's a fair assumption that work schedules and locations are known by supervisors, managers and co-workers - if there's a problem, finding where the worker is will be the least of the problem. And a GPS won't be able to tell when there's a problem.
I was also concerned that the staff proposing this couldn't tell us of another municipality where this is in place, suggesting that either it isn't a good idea, or that full research on the idea hadn't taken place. I'm a firm believer in gathering all the information that's out there before submitting a proposal, and that groundwork hasn't yet been done. The concerns raised by the privacy commissioner the day after our meeting also seem to indicate that the proposal had missed a fairly important piece of research.
Although the proposal focused on the need for safety, many of the comments and questions since have focused on the potential of using this technology for monitoring where outside workers are, and when, and for checking on such things as length of coffee breaks. I totally disagree with this. We pay supervisors and managers good salaries, part of which are for doing the actual work of supervising and managing employees, and I believe that far better results occur from face-to-face discussions of expectations and issues of non-performance, than from electronic surveillance.
There's also an inequity here of how we treat inside and outside workers. As far as I know, we do not monitor inside employees, who may well spend time talking to co-workers, on inappropriate web-sites, or updating their Facebook pages when they should be working. Perhaps we're less concerned because the public is unlikely to see these behaviours and complain, but if we're going to set up a system for monitoring, we'd better be sure that we're treating all employees the same.
The proposed policy has been sent back for further development and consultation, particularly with the unions. Hopefully, before it shows up before us again, the research has been done to answer everyone's questions.
" There will come a time when it isn't 'They're spying on me through my phone' any more. Eventually it will be 'My phone is spying on me'." - Philip K. Dick
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Assessing the Risks of Change
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
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)