Pressure continues to mount on local municipal councils as they examine budgets and attempt to answer perceived wants, apparent needs and meet legislated obligations – all without excessive tax increases.
The anguish is understood for those of us that actually care about local government. We say actually care, since it is our experience that only a very small percentage of voters is engaged enough to understand the many problems that councils face.
Amongst councils’ duties are scads of legislative requirements imposed by Queen’s Park. A homeowner’s current water bill, planning regulations, accessibility rules, road standards, libraries, recycling goals, fire fighting, policing, social services and seniors housing all are, in one way or another, affected by provincial regulations. Along with those impositions comes little in the way of corresponding funding.
Those must-do elements (and there are many more) compete with local needs. It is reasonable to suggest those are core activities.
Many communities chose long ago to have substantive parks and recreation facilities to keep youth engaged and promote healthy lifestyles. Passive recreation, like the installation of walking trails, clean parks and splash pads for kids, are all investments in a community’s well-being.
The variance to core activities is a matter of local interpretation and acceptance of meeting minimum standards.
Clearly the County of Wellington and most of its townships push for standards that are in excess of the minimums, but those choices can be regarded just as easily as capital investments in quality for the longer term – a position we tend to embrace.
A number of years ago, we were asked as then-mayor of Guelph-Eramosa, to address a Grade 5 class about local government. Part of the address included a bit of a who’s who game on the two levels of government. It was a way to interact with the kids and at least get away from the boring, lecture style address politicians tend to push. Anyway, as we worked our way through the list, it became apparent that those bright kids were a little more logical than politicians sitting around the council tables at that time. Rather than accept who did what – they wondered why it was done the way it was. It was a bit of an eye-opener we have not forgotten.
Dealing with taxation issues today and trying to figure out budgets often misses that kind of questioning. Certainly, before a city-style governance mentality swept into formerly sleepy townships, there were lots of questions and things were small enough for there to be answers.
Things now have become too big and too unwieldy for councillors, let alone department heads, to have all the answers.
That is in no way meant as a criticism of current officials. But we believe it to be akin to the old expression that if you are to deal with a problem, people have to first admit there is a problem. It is virtually impossible to expect expert status with the size of governments running here today.
After 15 years operating under the current financial and operational set-up, it is past time for a thorough review, an idea we have promoted now for five years and two election cycles. The longer it is left waiting, the more severe the correction will be.
