City of Cranbrook Five Year Financial Plan 2011 to 2015 - Comments by CLC
Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society
c/o 2112 – 5 St. N.
Cranbrook, BC V1C 4Y3
(250) 489-4412
March 7, 2011
Mayor & Council
City of Cranbrook
40 – 10 Ave. S.
Cranbrook, BC V1C
Re: Proposed Five Year Financial Plan 2011 to 2015
Dear Mayor & Council:
It is appreciated that City Council opens the budget discussions to the public and invites comment. However, on behalf of CLC Society, I have some observations from my experience in the last two years regarding the budget process:
- The public can sit in the Council Chambers while the Council and staff review the detailed budget papers in front of them. There is no opportunity afforded the public to ask questions. It can be a rather bewildering experience without having any documents in front of oneself to follow along.
- It is unfortunate that I happened to miss another budget meeting because the time had been subsequently changed from when it was announced at the Council meeting. How are the budget meetings advertised to the public?
- In a large article in The Townsman, Friday, March 4, the Mayor invited the public to comment on the Five Year Plan. This gave little time for the public to pick up and peruse the document, if they hadn’t already, and to become informed sufficiently to have a letter in to City Hall by the deadline on Monday, March 7.
To my knowledge, I have been the lone person at these discussions, over the last couple of years. Perhaps if Council engaged the public more, held the discussions at times the majority of people could attend, and had copies of the budget available to review during the discussions, it might get some more public interest in this important process.
Following the February 21 Council meeting, I picked up a copy of the Proposed Five Year Financial Plan. Subsequently, The Townsman reports on March 4, “Council is very aware that it’s a tough economic environment out there and so we’re trying to keep our spending very low. There’s no real new spending, there’s no new positions, there’s nothing like that.” Manjak said. “It’s maintaining the services where they are, with the priorities of infrastructure and roads. Council thinks it’s a very reasonable tax increase given roads and infrastructure are our priority.” Again, without having the benefit of more detailed understanding and in keeping with Council’s spirit of keeping spending very low, there are some items that I’d like to raise:
1. Page 8 – In 2011: St. Mary’s Park Trail and Picnic Area $200,000. Perhaps this item could be deferred for some future time. Given that the steepness of the trail would prohibit the majority of residents from accessing this park, except for residents of Shadow Mountain, there is no immediate need to use these funds this year.
2. Page 9 – In 2012: There is the proposed purchase of a new garbage truck for $200,000. Then in 2013: Garbage Truck – mechanized pickup/bins (borrow) $700,000. Again, without more detailed information, it is not clear how this mechanized pickup truck/bins would be a cost savings to our community. Would you please provide additional information on this item.
3. Page 11 – Special projects – the Rotary Park plaque of $20,000. Without knowing the details about this item it seems to me that $20,000 is a large sum for a plaque. Could that money be better used elsewhere?
4. Page 13 – Development Cost Charge Activity – Development cost charge monies of $247,600 may be used to pay developers in 2011 for oversizing rebates. With our DCC’s set at $2,032 per residential lot, this amount would suggest that every cent brought in from 122 lots would be required to pay for the oversized pipes. Does this mean that taxpayers would be left to support the rest of the development site services for water, sewer, storm sewers, roads and parks? When is the City going to raise the DCC’s, and to what amount?
5. In general:
a. City Council Meetings dispersal of ‘discretionary funds’. When reviewing the unbudgeted dispersals that the City hands out in meetings to groups/organizations I wonder: How are the funds decided on? What is the criteria? Is there a limit? Is there a review of the request made before agreeing to the asked amount?
b. With municipal taxes projected to increase 8% in 2012, and utility fees increasing, many taxpayers would like to know how City Council identifies savings and how it balances the various needs in our community (social, environmental, infrastructure/equipment, recreation, arts/culture).
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours truly,
Sharon Cross, President