Municipal Budgeting Ineptitude
It's Ottawa's misfortune that it elected, in its voter stupidity, a mayor who has had to learn on the job, and one who, furthermore, has a criminal indictment hanging over him, yet to go to trial.
A mayor who was a successful businessman and wanted a new challenge, deciding to foist himself on the citizens of Ottawa. His vaunted business acumen, along with a strident campaign promise that he would not raise taxes, elevated him in the opinion of a majority of voters over a far more seasoned and adept candidate for the office.
And now we're stuck with the man, who has the unmitigated gall to insist that there is nothing untoward in his sitting in the mayor's chair while being charged with corruption in electoral malfeasance. He's been glad-handing, and winging it ever since, playing municipal councillors and maneuvering a nice balance in his support, while others grin and bear his presence.
How stupid can people be, to elect a man who has had no grounding whatever in municipal, let alone any level of politics beyond the business arena, on the basis that their taxes will not be raised? Rather than accept that costs of services rise steadily, as do all other costs, and property owners must be prepared to countenance some level of rising taxes if we are to be assured of municipal services.
And such services go well beyond garbage collection; they ensure that the proper infrastructure is in place to adequately treat waste water and to provide safely potable drinking water; to fund local policing and fire services; to maintain our public roadways in all seasons; to adequately maintain critical civil infrastructure; to look to the provision of assisted housing; along with a multitude of other services such as public transit, public health facilities and the maintenance of city parks.
These are all assets to the population, they represent a quality of life issue for residents of the city. Residents who also like to think that there is an obligation to support arts, culture and recreation, but not to the extent that they could short-change the more vulnerable in the population, people whose incomes are at such a low level that they barely subsist, and require help from the municipality for child care issues, and public housing.
Yet the city finds itself struggling to maintain its budget to avoid a critical deficit, one that could only grow year by year. The city's financial staff has taken a fine tooth-comb to various municipal-run operations, proffering a number of options to avoid a too-hefty property tax increase, and still provide core services. Staff cut-backs, letting go hundreds of municipal workers.
The imposition of higher recreational user-fees; cutting transit routes; cutting public health and child care services. And cutting back on supportive housing, cultural services, bylaw enforcement, long-term care funding and capping rental supplements. The $35.5 million 'saving' that would result from these service cut-backs would translate into a 5% rise in taxes.
Sounds as though property taxpayers may be receptive out of sheer necessity, to an average $120 annual increase in property taxes, already among the highest in the country. Of course the trade-off is to cut quality-of-life-affirming services to poor families, to the homeless, to children living below the poverty line. And what kind of city would that be?
Who could be proud of living in a municipality that looks after the interests of the middle class while blithely ignoring the presence of the vulnerable among us, those who need a helping hand so they can get by? Far better we be hit with a higher, and still acceptable rise in our taxes, enabling the city to retain all the services they're so prepared to cut.
A mayor who was a successful businessman and wanted a new challenge, deciding to foist himself on the citizens of Ottawa. His vaunted business acumen, along with a strident campaign promise that he would not raise taxes, elevated him in the opinion of a majority of voters over a far more seasoned and adept candidate for the office.
And now we're stuck with the man, who has the unmitigated gall to insist that there is nothing untoward in his sitting in the mayor's chair while being charged with corruption in electoral malfeasance. He's been glad-handing, and winging it ever since, playing municipal councillors and maneuvering a nice balance in his support, while others grin and bear his presence.
How stupid can people be, to elect a man who has had no grounding whatever in municipal, let alone any level of politics beyond the business arena, on the basis that their taxes will not be raised? Rather than accept that costs of services rise steadily, as do all other costs, and property owners must be prepared to countenance some level of rising taxes if we are to be assured of municipal services.
And such services go well beyond garbage collection; they ensure that the proper infrastructure is in place to adequately treat waste water and to provide safely potable drinking water; to fund local policing and fire services; to maintain our public roadways in all seasons; to adequately maintain critical civil infrastructure; to look to the provision of assisted housing; along with a multitude of other services such as public transit, public health facilities and the maintenance of city parks.
These are all assets to the population, they represent a quality of life issue for residents of the city. Residents who also like to think that there is an obligation to support arts, culture and recreation, but not to the extent that they could short-change the more vulnerable in the population, people whose incomes are at such a low level that they barely subsist, and require help from the municipality for child care issues, and public housing.
Yet the city finds itself struggling to maintain its budget to avoid a critical deficit, one that could only grow year by year. The city's financial staff has taken a fine tooth-comb to various municipal-run operations, proffering a number of options to avoid a too-hefty property tax increase, and still provide core services. Staff cut-backs, letting go hundreds of municipal workers.
The imposition of higher recreational user-fees; cutting transit routes; cutting public health and child care services. And cutting back on supportive housing, cultural services, bylaw enforcement, long-term care funding and capping rental supplements. The $35.5 million 'saving' that would result from these service cut-backs would translate into a 5% rise in taxes.
Sounds as though property taxpayers may be receptive out of sheer necessity, to an average $120 annual increase in property taxes, already among the highest in the country. Of course the trade-off is to cut quality-of-life-affirming services to poor families, to the homeless, to children living below the poverty line. And what kind of city would that be?
Who could be proud of living in a municipality that looks after the interests of the middle class while blithely ignoring the presence of the vulnerable among us, those who need a helping hand so they can get by? Far better we be hit with a higher, and still acceptable rise in our taxes, enabling the city to retain all the services they're so prepared to cut.
Labels: Human Relations, Realities
posted by Pieface @ 5:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home