City council’s decision this week to stream $1 million out of capital reserves and into a museum project to celebrate Red Deer has raised some hackles in the community.
Inevitably, city spending beyond the formal annual budget process invokes dismay in certain circles, inside and outside council chambers. If a project was not deemed worthy of spending during budget deliberations, why is it now, critics ask?
The official answer, in this case, seems to be about information: during budget discussions, not enough detail was available to city council to make an informed decision.
But city staff, and council, are aware of how the process works and when they have to have their ducks in a row.
Extraordinary requests, for unforeseen expenses, are one thing. But a permanent museum exhibit focusing on Red Deer’s past hardly seems a matter of dire need.
Certainly the project is worthy of being discussed, but a decision on its fate should be made in concert with an examination of all of the museum’s plans, and all of the cultural needs in the community. That means it should have been more fully discussed during budget talks, or held until the next round of winter budget talks. Dealing with it in a vacuum now seems inappropriate.
Outside of the desire to have it in place to coincide with Red Deer centennial celebrations in 2013, the timing of completing this museum project would seem inconsequential.
Ultimately, $1 million is not a lot of money. The city’s current operational budget is $263.166 million and its capital budget is $86.72 million (down from $107 million and $475 million the two previous years).
But taxpayers have a right to consistent fiscal planning from their leaders, and they have a right to know how it is that spending can be accomplished without affecting the bottom line. (And everyone should always remember that reserves, no matter how they arrived in city coffers, ultimately came from taxpayers.)
This year, taxpayers faced a 3.9 per cent hike in taxes, after council decided to place the bulk of the burden for spending increases on citizenry. The year before, the tax increase was softened to 3.3 per cent through the use of municipal reserves. That was the lowest tax increase for Red Deer ratepayers in a decade.
So sometimes the reserves are in play and sometimes not. Sometimes council expresses concerns about diminishing reserves, and sometimes it dips into them with apparent ease.
Just what is the process for dipping into the capital projects reserve? Are there any checks placed on the reserves to protect them — and us — from one-off fiscal decisions by one council that may impede a future council’s ability to handle a financial crisis?
We ask a great deal of city council, and the administration that advises it: we want quality services, and often more of them. Plus, we want them at a bargain price.
Council has managed its fiscal house well in recent years, putting a lid on tax increases while hanging tough on services. And the recently-instituted three-year plans show a good sense of future forecasting.
And we all know that provincial and federal funding for municipalities has been repeatedly squeezed in the last 15 years.
But in an economic climate where the phrase ‘fixed income’ seems to define far too many people’s means, it is essential that council make every dollar count.
And wavering from the plan, even momentarily, suggests a lack of commitment. Once a sound business plan is established, it should be followed except in times of extreme crisis.
The need for a permanent exhibit on the history of Red Deer hardly seems critical.
John Stewart is the Advocate’s managing editor.