My Take on WL Council's 2nd Budget Mtg

Last night - WL Council, in a Budget Committee, held its' 2nd Budget Meeting

And at times - it seemed Mayor Kerry Cook looked like "Rodney Dangerfield" in being unable to control Councillors Geoff Bourdon and Sue Zacharias at various times during the meeting.

Councillor Bourdon took exception on a number of times with his fellow Council colleagues about their focus on 2012 rather than on the 5 year financial plan and the need to remember that Council makes Policy and Staff act on policy decisions of Council and I wonder if he is setting himself up for a run at Mayor Cook in October of 2014

A few notes:

1) Thanks to Mayor/Council for trying out this new budget process and attempting to proactively engage the public.  Mayor Cook & I talked about using social media tools like Facebook for the 2013 Budget year to engage the public.  She was concerned about the public's ability to have that "honest conversation" around what a budget should look like and enabling the public to have access to all facts before posting but I stated that it was more necessary to put the general question of "What do you want your City of Williams Lake Budget to be?" and let the public run with it.  As I've stated before - all ideas, no matter left or right field they may be, should always be welcome, until such time, a decision is made to reject them and then take the time to explain, in Plain English, why an idea(s) can not proceed

2) Thanks also to Councillor Zacharias for willing to being open to look at all options for City needs including need to contract out, if necessary, for City Services.  Sometimes, purchasing City equipment is necessary because contracting out may not make sense at the end of the day but at least let's put it on the table for discussion.  Thanks as well to City CAO Brian Carruthers for explaining why the contracting out of plotter services does not make sense, from the City's organizational needs point of view

3) Councillor Rathor, as he promised & as per Council Resolution from the Jan 18th Budget Mtg, moved that Council Remuneration or Pay be maintained at existing levels ($43,000 for Mayor & $15,000 for Councillor).  However, Councillors' Geoff Bourdon, Sue Zacharias and Laurie Walters argued it was time for a raise.  Councillor Walters first argued that she understood now the time required to be a City Councillor and a raise would be justified.  In addition, she said this to Greg Fry of the Rush after last night's Budget Meeting:

“It’s go back to considering your worth and I know the time that is put in and time away from other important things like family.”

Councillor Geoff Bourdon then argued Council should stick with Policy which states that Council Pay be adjusted with changes to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which has never gone below zero in recent times.  The lowest point that CPI reached was 0.5%.  Furthermore, on Facebook this morning, Councillor Bourdon stated to me:

As I suggested in the meeting Steve it should be tied to the consumer index that way it completely reflects the times. If' things get hard and go down, council compensation goes down, if it goes up they go up. I have yet to see a more equitable system.

I appreciate the point. We do seem to have differing philosophies on this point and believe me if it was about the money and not the principle the little raise that it would make is hardly worth the optics.

When I ran for local government in 2005, 2008 and 2011 - I knew what the pay package was and it really didn't matter to me what I was paid - I could be paid nothing and I'd still do the job (Councillor/CRD Director) because I would love the role and not necessarily for the pay that comes with it.  The message that Councillor Rathor was attempting to convey to Councillors Bourdon, Walters and Zacharias - it is about the message we send to the community -- we're not here for the money but because we want to serve our community.  Council Stipends were originally designed to compensate those serving for time put in and expenses for serving.  As one taxpayer - I'm glad to see Williams Lake Mayor Kerry Cook and Councillors Ivan Bonnell, Danica Hughes,  and Surinderpal Rathor get this and "two thumbs down" to Councillors Geoff Bourdon, Laurie Walters and Sue Zacharias for considering themselves, rather than the people who sent them to Williams Lake City Hall!

4) There was slated to be a Public Comment period at the end of the meeting however Councillor Geoff Bourdon decided that he had enough after 2 hours & 45 minutes of a budget meeting and called, by motion, for the meeting to adjourn.  It was seconded by Councillor Bonnell and as adjournment motions can not be debated, Mayor Cook was forced by practice to put the question to Council which carried.  For the Feb 14th Budget Meeting #3 - Council must permit the "Public Comment" period at the beginning of its' Budget Meetings, otherwise it should just discontinue this procedure.  I get the sense that the budget process was not necessarily run by Council beforehand to ensure Council was onboard... With six people showing up to observe and make use of the "Public Comment" period - it is sad to see the message that Council sent to these six people

Hopefully - the Feb 14th Budget Meeting will run a lot smoother

SBF

Update: Forget to mention, Mayor/Council discussed implementing a Capital Reserve which Williams Lake City Staff have been tasked to bring options forward for WL Council consideration.  During discussion - Councillor Zacharias brought forward the idea of "pre-taxing" similiar to what the Cariboo-Chilcotin Regional Hospital District does and it is something City residents' should begin to think about as the City paid out $900,000 in interest alone in 2011 and the City could save that money by pre-taxing for capital programs later by paying for them with cash.

It is something worth considering - as well, the City will need to top up the "Rainy Day" from its' current level of (Estimated) $398,000 to $1.3 million by 2014 by use of the Gaming Funds. I know that this idea will not be popular with some but if we don't - the City will be in a "rock & a hard place" if an emergency (sinkhole, etc) does occur and we don't have sufficient funds to tide us through

SBF