It’s an unfortunate sign of the times when a municipality finds itself compelled to spend tax dollars for a mere chance at getting some, well, tax dollars.
At its Aug. 25 meeting, Mapleton council passed a resolution to retain the services of a third party to help the township submit an expression of interest to the Ontario Community Infrastructure Program for funds to aid with reconstruction of a bowstring arch bridge on Sideroad 17.
Council took the action on the advice of public works director and acting CAO/clerk Brad McRoberts, who suggested “strategically that it might be advantageous to have a third party do it, just to pick up those key buzzwords.”
By key buzzwords, McRoberts is referring to whatever language the government of the day happens to be using to spin its current policy initiatives and political aims, generally including words like “synergies,” “empowerment,” “maximize,” and “leverage.”
In Mapleton’s case, the move is being undertaken due to a perceived lack of success in obtaining grants for infrastructure projects dispersed through so-called “merit-based” programs, which replaced the unconditional funds municipalities once received to assist with projects beyond the realistic scope of the municipal tax base. The system pits municipalities against each other in competing for a limited pool of funding, with each trying to find just the right formula in terms of political attractiveness and the percentage of project cost for which to request funding.
It’s a system that creates winners and losers – and considerable bitterness around municipal council tables.
The suggestion to go with third party grant application help sparked some interesting discussion among councillors.
Councillor Lori Woodham urged council to consider spending money to train staff in grant writing, rather than on outside consultants. This might have been a better way to go and might have saved money in the long run, as staff time is generally more economical than consulting fees.
However, either way, it’s ridiculous that municipalities have to resort to such machinations to craft what should be relatively straightforward applications.
Perhaps it’s time both federal and provincial governments heed ongoing calls from municipal politicians for a larger portion of undesignated funds they can allocate to their own local priorities. If we need a new buzzword to make the idea more palatable to the bureaucrats perhaps we could go with something like “logic-based funding.”
Nah. It’ll never catch on.
