Sunday, January 29, 2012

Draft 2012 City of WL Capital/Operations Budgets...

Friday afternoon - the Meeting Agenda for Tuesday's 2nd Budget Meeting for Williams Lake City Council was made available.  Please note - numbers are preliminary until Williams Lake Council makes decisions around the 2012 Capital/Operations Budgets

Find the Agenda and Budgets here

Right off the bat - I want to say that, though I'm happy with the thorough information provided, one mistake was made -- Public input should be before Council deliberates the Draft Budgets and not after - otherwise there really isn't much point of asking the public to comment at these meetings

Staff will be asking Williams Lake City Council to deliberate the following questions:

a) Revenue:

• Fees & Charges – Does Council wish to review our current fees and
charges? Does Council have specific objectives or guiding principles
for fees and charges?

• Government Transfers – Does Council wish to allocate unconditional
grants for specific purposes?

• Reserves – What should we be doing to help protect ourselves against
uncertain future? What level of reserves are appropriate for a cushion
against assessment appeals, funding cuts from senior government and
emergencies?

• Utility Rates – Does Council wish to review utility rates?

b)Expenses:

• Debt /Borrowing - Does Council wish to set a limit on the % of debt
servicing? Does Council have specific objectives or guiding principles
for incurring debt? How will upcoming projects – Western Avenue
Extension/Westside Connector (to support new residential
development), Hwy 97 North Corridor, Recreation Complex
Improvements be financed?

• Service Levels – Does Council wish to maintain current levels of
service - Increase? Decrease?

• Capital – How does Council wish to finance the maintenance and
replacement of the City’s physical infrastructure?

c) Review of 2012 Draft Capital/Operations Budgets and related matters

Personal Observations:

1) The Draft 5 Year Financial Plan should include projected tax increases for the current financial year (2012) and the subsequent four (4) years

2) Downtown Parking Tax should be discussed for elimination (Consult local BIA Board) - could help with business advantage for Williams Lake downtown core...

3) The Capital Budget Requests/Supplementary Budget Items Request Forms seems a bit "stale".  To freshen them up - it should include the City's Logo, whether they are a Priority 1, 2 or 3 & how they relate to the City's Integrated Community Sustainability Plan or ICSP and finally an estimated percentage of tax increase, if the money is coming from the General Fund (property taxation)

3) On Page 14 - I'd like to see the City move forward this year for Internet Broadcast Cameras. As City Staff note - without it, it is very difficult to get previous meetings and in addition, it'll allow people who don't necessary have SHAW TV but have an interest in WL Council business to watch meetings when their schedule allows.  This project was successful in both Prince George and Kamloops.  The best one I've seen is in Prince George where you can watch the meeting video and see the Agenda Item at the same time so you know exactly what Council is deliberating at that moment

4) On Page 15 - City Staff have asked for $50,000 for 2012 to purchase a variety of IT equipment including iPad2 tablets for Council plus 1 spare iPad2.  The question that this request raises in my mind - while the iPad's having been purchased already and are in use.. what if Council formally rejects the capital item request.  The old saying of - "Closing the barn door after the horses are gone" applies here.  I would be interested in hearing how the purchase of iPad's were done in the City's budget lines in 2011 (can not find where money was authorized to pay for iPad's in 2011) and why this request to authorize is coming forward...

5) On Page 20 - City Staff have requested a Capital Item for $55,000 for a new "First Response" Fire Truck.  While I don't dispute the need - I wonder if Staff have shopped around (including the Lower Mainland) to get a better deal.  $55,000 sounds a bit too high for a pick-up truck.  Sure - taxpayers' might want their tax money used locally but I think the higher principle of 'best use of taxpayers' $$$" applies here

6) On Page 21 - City Staff have requested a Capital Item for a replacement of the 1981 Fire Apparatus, Unit 011. Again - I don't dispute need but given this unit would be used by both City residents' & CRD Residents (Rural Fringe) for fire services - perhaps funds for this come from the upcoming City of WL-CRD Fire Services Agreement

7) On Page 26 - Station House Gallery Project.  Funds allocated as follows:

* Community Works of $160,000
* Gaming of $100,000
* Grant of $375,000

I've heard from a few who think that this project should be "paused" and I agree.  In the meantime - Council should use all Gaming money for next 3 years to put into City "Rain Day" Fund (Surplus Reserve) and top it up for next 3 years.  If that was done (assume $300,000 in Gaming Funds per year) - the Surplus Reserve would have a balance of $1,298,000 by the end of 2014 (with City Policy stating that $400,000 must remain in the account at all times)

8) On Page 29 - Instead of purchasing a new vehicle (Hybrid SUV at cost of $45,000) for a City Department Head (ie: Kevin Goldfuss/Joe Engelberts) position- why not cover a portion of his operating costs for his personal vehicle for City business.

9) On Page 41 - Electronic Speed Signs - I wonder if we can't ask "SpeedWatch" for use of their electronic speed signs instead and save taxpayers' $40,000

10) On Page 44 - Retaining Wall failure by Jelco Supplies - as Staff note - the retaining wall was constructed by the Ministry of Transportation at the time and wonder if the City should not be aggressively pursuing funds for replacement from the Ministry.  If that turns out to be a failure - then, with regret, the project should move forward...

11) On Pages 51 and 52  - Land Acquisition- Oliver Street Trailhead - I'd like to see this project deferred until 2013 and in the meantime, use the $150,000 Gaming funds for this project & put into the City's "Rainy Day" account

12) On Page 65 - Woodland Drive Water/Sewer - unless the City gets a grant of some kind for this badly needed project.  I'd like to see us either try to partner up with the Cariboo Regional District for their water system needs in the Mountview area or borrow the money ($3,500,000) via a full referendum but prior to the vote - that the "Local Service Tax Area" be established first, as per Sections 210-214 of the Community Charter - read here

13) On Pages 84-91 -- the proposed Travel Budgets for Mayor/Council are discussed.  With regard to Mayor Cook - I question the need to spend $300 in 100 Mile House for a hotel room for 2 days for the NCLGA (North Central Local Gov't Association) Conference when she can easily drive back and forth between WL-100 Mile and still save money.  $268.80 for meals for Mayor/Council at NCLGA  - Seems to be a bit high for a 2 day conference  - I personally think that this amount should be a quarter of that - more like $50 or $60 for a two day conference by finding cheaper meals...  As for UBCM (Union of BC Municipalities) - $ 600 for a 5 day conference which works out to $40 per meal seems really and I can't see how that you can't find a meal (breakfast, lunch and dinner) for saying $15-20 each.  Also note -- Had Mayor Cook and Councillors Bourdon, Walters and Zacharias had skipped the Local Gov't Leadership Academy (as they should have) - City taxpayers' would have saved $5,003.20.  Also note - City CAO Brian Carruthers' total travel budget in 2012 will be $7,886.71 with Councillors Bourdon, Hughes, Walters and Zacharias having a total travel budget of $6,071.76 with Councillors Bonnell /Rathor having a total travel budget of $4,820.96 and Mayor Cook having a total travel budget (suggested) of $12,500 with confirmed travel budget costs of $9,806.71

14) On Page 93 - Mayor Cook put in for reimbursement for a number of items including Safeway, former Beeotcheese Restaurant, Cariboo Ski, Joey's Grill, Signal Pt Restaurant, Sushi/Steak totalling $173.38.   The financial reporting structure in this case should be improved by showing date, time, location, purpose of reimbursement, whether or not Council Policy permits it to be reimbursed and who signed off on it (this applies to all members of WL Council & senior WL City Staff)

15) Bottom of Page 97/Page 98 - Luncheon and Business Meetings - A couple of noteworthy items.  $814 for appys at the Dec 6th Inaugural Meeting of Council and then $300 for a Council dinner at Ming's on Dec 29th, 2011 - no purpose given.  Many thousands of dollars would be saved if people (Committee or Council members) had to bring their own dinner to Committee/Council Meetings.  As an aside - I do not get any meal at a Cariboo Regional District APC Meeting except 1 dinner per year (if the Area Director takes their APC out for lunch/dinner) with the Director being allowed to cover a meal of $20 per attendee.

16) On Pages 104-105: City Staff levels are discussed.  As I have stated before - a number of positions should be revisited including the Communications Coordinator, Executive Assistant,, Contract Planner, Manager of Finance and Manager of IT positions.  In addition, the City should look at amalgamating the admin positions throughout the City (from the CMRC, Airport and Fire Hall) to City Hall itself.  No one likes seeing people be let go but taxpayers' are struggling and need a break - more now than ever.  In fact - just last week, I had one reader comment saying that he felt the City does not need an Executive Assistant.  In addition, the IT Manager position was once a contract position and should be so today (in my opinion).  For the record - the CAO and his Senior Managers' propose that the Staff FTE (full time equivalent) increase from 90.75 to 91.25 or an increase of 0.5 FTE all departments wide from 2011 to 2012.  Since 2008 to proposed 2012 Budget - City Staffing has increased by 2.75 FTE from 88.50 FTE (2008) to 91.25 (proposed 2012 Budget)

17) On Page 106: The City Staff Training Budgets are discussed.  Again - it would be great if the budget revealed the training plan for 2012 and if those training session are Priority 1, 2 or 3.  For the record - 2011 Actual (General Fund) was $124,180 and propose in 2012 that this increase to $163,150 or an increase of 31.4% from 2011 - Actual (estimated) to 2012 (proposed).  Total Training Budget in 2011 (Actual - all funds) is $202,099 with proposed 2012 Budget to be $212,340 or increase of 6%

18) On Page 119: Staff have proposed that, in 2012, total principal/interest on the City's debt will be $1,269,200

Final Thoughts:

Although, there are worthy projects (Capital) proposed in 2012 by Staff and whatever Councillors/Mayor Cook may propose be done in 2012 - there is certainly plenty of room to cut and yes - a 0% property tax budget is possible with required political will.  However, I'd like to see Council propose a budget with a tax hike of 1.7% or less (less than inflation and what the CRD proposed to its' residents' before new/improved CRD services).  If this was done - it would be, in effect, a "net zero" budget to residential property owners, after the home owner grant was factored in

Will it happen ... time will tell.

Again - I strongly encourage you to come out on Tuesday at 6pm and attend WL Council Chambers and after reviewing this document - should you not like what is in it - please come and tell Williams Lake City Council so they can keep your comments/thoughts in mind while preparing this year's budget as the community is being given a very unique opportunity to help WL Council craft the budget... as it was once said -- a local government budget is not simply "a budget" but the "community's budget".

Help make the City's Budget a "community budget"

SBF

14 comments:

Steve Forseth said...

Former Williams Lake City Councillor Shaun Driver left me this comment, via Facebook:

"Do you notice what question is never there? Questions regarding efficiency... whether they are inclusive of staff (as they should be to start) to try and scale back savings. Or.. if that process doesn't work... w/o staff.

Waste. Never tackled at City Hall... because it is a NASTY long process that scares people away."

Anonymous said...

That's an increase of 2.75 FTEs since 2008 Steve, not since last year. Either learn to read or learn to be honest

Steve Forseth said...

Anonymous:

Thank you for your comment...

The Staffing Level part of this blog post has been corrected...

Thanks for pointing that out..

Steve

Anonymous said...

I would say that an increase of less than 3 positions in 4 years is pretty good for a local government.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 1:29 you must work for the city. As our population has been decreasing in the past few years shouldn't the amount of city staff be reduced accordingly? It is just typical for city staff to always want to increase taxes staff and such every year just because. Time to face reality and reduce the taxpayers burden. There is no more money!

Anonymous said...

Why are we expected to fund a vehicle for the City Manager. I find it absolutely deplorable that this item is even in the budget.

I can only assume it is to accomodate the fact that the current CAO now is living out of town and does not want to pay for the costs of the commute out of his own pocket.
If Mayor and Council did approve this expenditure then the vehicle should not leave City Hall parking lot out side of on City business. Mr Carruthers has a vehicle and the City could fund his vehilce through the travel allowance policy as with all other managers etc again if it is to do with City business. Getting to and from work is not City business but a requirement of all employees in order to keep their job.

If what a previous blogger has said we are also fudning his education. Mayor Cook needs to take her blinders off when it comes to Mr Carruthers and put the taxpayers first. He has single handly destroyed the moral at City Hall...that has been ignored and to do this will just makes things worse. His empire building and sense of entitlement is scary!!

Mayor and Council please think of us the taxpayers. Stand up to Mr.Carruthers, make him accountable and do not enable him.

Steve Forseth said...

Anonymous at 6:00pm...

Thank you for your comment but I should clarify the Hybrid SUV would be for the use of either Kevin Goldfuss (Municipal Services Director), Joe Engelberts (Manager of Water/Waste) or Reg Ryan (Manager of Transportation/Buildings) and the new vehicle would not be for the use of Brian Carruthers. But I do agree - any new vehicle should remain on City property and personal vehicles used to get to/from City work...

Again - thanks for your comment..

Steve

Anonymous said...

And what would you (Anonymous at 6:00pm) know about the morale at City Hall?

Anonymous said...

"He has single handly destroyed the moral at City Hall...that has been ignored and to do this will just makes things worse. His empire building and sense of entitlement is scary!!"

I personally know at least a dozen city workers and each of them says morale has never been better. They also say Union/Management relations are excellent and have never been better. I'm sure I could find a couple disgruntled workers if I dug but that is true of any workplace, and they certainly don't represent the whole so assuming so is silly.

Anonymous said...

Thanks @10:47. That is the truth. And Steve, just because one person says he doesn't feel the City needs an executive assistant, does that mean everyone feels that way? You need to get some perspective man. Maybe you should spend a day in some of these people's shows to see what their job is like. Bet you it's a lot harder than tacking shots at people on your computer.
You'd be a lot less ignorant if you asked questions instead of making assumptions based on distorted information and your own bias.

Anonymous said...

Steve help me out here you think council should borrow money for the people on Woodland and spend thousands on internet meetings but you think taxes and debt should be low. Explain to me exactly how you can have both

Steve Forseth said...

Anonymous at 4:09pm...

Thanks for your question...

On Woodland Drive - I believe that there is an undeniable need to get basic water/sewer services for the 49 residents there. In a perfect situation - this would be funded by grants from Ottawa/Victoria plus a local area tax (which Woodland Drive residents have already said that have no issue with), however, at the end of the day, if we have to borrow money for this project - I would say, with regret, that it should go forward, subject to direct voter assent (full referendum) and let the community decide, but the Woodland Drive residents' must have water/sewer very soon as well water options have literally expired... and anything other that municipal water/sewer is not available, according to what I've been told

As for the Internet Cameras - that is only $25,000 and it would be a "one time" capital cost and I believe this would be an excellent addition to City Hall infrastructure

As for how I would keep debt low - making sure projects are in "public interest" and getting biggest bang for dollar would be how I would accomplish this. Meanwhile, on taxes (and outside of core services like police, fire, water/sewer and snow removal) - I'd ensure City expenses were appropriate and ones that are in-line with public expectations...

Those are my views - they may not satisfy what you are looking for... but again, those are my own views...

And with the City's Collective Agreement with IUOE up for renewal in July 2012 - I'd like to see Council get an agreement with IUOE that sees a three-year agreement of 0% in the first year, 1.5% wage hike in Year 2 and 2% wage hike in the final year. That is what Quesnel Council gave CUPE in their last agreement in Quesnel for their municipal workers...

Steve

Anonymous said...

I agree that basic services like water to Woodland drive is a must as this is a service that people NEED. Get rid of all the nice to have's and there will be money for the needs like water.
Instead we put something like $80000 into a Rick Hansen sign? Oh ya just until the donations roll in.........how's that comming?

Steve Forseth said...

Anonymous at 5:43pm...

Thanks for your comment... I agree that when it comes to capital projects in any given year - it always comes down to NEEDS vs NICE TO HAVES.

As far as the Rick Hansen Memorial goes - it was a $60,000 project and not $80,000 and according to City Staff - $35,000 in donations have been secured with the remaining $25,000 to be acquired so the entire project can be secured by external funds...

Steve