To the editor:
As budget season approaches, the city website has taken to spouting flowery rhetoric about prioritizing services, planning for the future, and maintaining essential services.
Citizens are invited to share input online or with council members, but these overtures feel disingenuous, especially in light of recent actions. Public meetings appear more like publicity shows, and those who criticize council or staff often face dismissive treatment.
Meanwhile, the mayor continues to avoid addressing serious violations of the Municipal Act by senior staff.
Taxpayer Oversight and Representation
Taxpayers rely on council members to manage city finances responsibly, as most people lack the time or expertise to monitor these affairs closely. The council’s defining mandate is to protect taxpayers' interests and deliver value for money through necessary services—not to shift this responsibility onto citizens through token gestures of public engagement.
The city’s rhetoric suggests that taxpayers will accept superficial assurances. The Deputy Mayor’s comment that the budget is about “shaping the quality of life” rings hollow when residents face tax increases disconnected from service value or inflation rates. For example, the 2024 budget was misleadingly framed as a 2.97% increase, which would have been 4.92% without using $1 million in reserves to mask the true impact. Such misrepresentation undermines trust, as reflected in the city’s 2020 Code of Silence Award for Government Secrecy.
Concerning Practices and Mismanagement
The city’s financial practices are a few that reveal alarming trends:
- Misuse of Reserves: Discretionary reserves have ballooned from $22 million in 2012 to $74 million by 2023—$52 million taken from taxpayers beyond what was necessary to provide services. This undermines the principle that each generation should pay for its own services and infrastructure.
- Fleet Funding Formula: Taxpayers cover both current and future vehicle purchase costs, adding $9 million to the budget over seven years. This violates a fundamental municipal funding principle.
- Economic Development Department: This department costs taxpayers $900,000 annually, including $700,000 for six employees. Despite this, reports are sparse and lack measurable results. Population and business numbers have stagnated, raising questions about the department's effectiveness.
- Community Services Department: With $700,000 in expenses, including $475,000 for salaries, taxpayers are funding overlapping leadership roles without clear value.
- Accounting Violations: Redirecting interest earned on discretionary reserves out of operating revenues is a breach of accounting standards, costing taxpayers approximately $10 million since 2012.
- Unnecessary Positions:
- The Communications Officer serves primarily to spin facts favourably, offering no tangible benefit to taxpayers.
- The Accommodation Tax Collector position, created for a task requiring only two days a month, could easily be integrated into existing roles.
- The Assessment & Real Estate Specialist, costing over $100,000 annually, would be better suited as a contract position given the city's lack of growth.
The Path Forward
Unless significant changes are made, budget deliberations will likely continue to rubber-stamp staff proposals, with reserves manipulated to mask rising costs. Taxpayers deserve transparent and responsible governance that prioritizes essential services and ensures value for every dollar spent. It’s time for the council to uphold its mandate, address systemic inefficiencies, and rebuild public trust.
Donald Rennick CPA, CA
North Bay,
