To the editor:
Once again, we see the budget process being controlled by senior staff to the detriment of the city council and taxpayers. The lovely colour introductory pages included this year do nothing to support the budget and are a waste of time and effort.
The 2024 operating budget is a 168-page document that staff has spent weeks or even months producing and is being passed to councillors for approval.
Council members are expected within a four- or five-day time frame to examine, digest, and formulate their concerns. Then they are expected to address those concerns over a four-day marathon of meetings. This is not nearly enough time.
I spent two days examining the document and I am not through it yet. I am attaching a list of issues below, some of which are presentation queries and some of which are related to increases in line items that pop up on first perusal.
What council needs is to have two or three weeks to ask informational questions about the document itself before deciding what in-depth questions need to be answered about the budget levels.
One big issue of course is the 2023 actuals which the report indicates are subject to adjustment. The question becomes what is the magnitude of these supposed adjustments? Does this fact make the 2023 actuals unusable for comparison to the 2024 estimates and if so, what is the purpose of including them in the report? If they are comparable why bother mentioning that adjustments are possible?
The budget has risen by 4.76% over last year's budget but is over 7% higher than last year's actual expenditures. One also has to keep in mind that 2024 is still using $1.6 million in reserves which serves to mitigate the tax levy but does not decrease expenses.
This is just moving problems down the road and has to be addressed immediately.
Council needs to take charge of this process and actually represent the interests of taxpayers who are being asked to contribute over $1.1 million in 2024 to do so.
Donald Rennick
North Bay
Questions that need to be cleared up in 2024 budget document
In the 2023 budget Building department, temporary salaries were $86,997 plus fringe benefits of $22,350. In the 2024 budget they appear to be grouped with regular salaries. This action reduces the YOY % increase in regular salaries and benefits.
Additionally, the YOY increase from 2022 total actual salaries of $765,923 to $1,010,857 is 32%. As a result of using the previous year's budget figures for purposes of comparison to the current year's budget, the 2023 budget indicated that the increase in this department's wages was 3.96%. This is exactly why comparing last year's budget figures is a waste of time and detrimental to taxpayers. Undoubtedly, staff will have some type of explanation for this massive increase but it behooves council to insist that the increase be made obvious in budget documents and to ensure they are allowed to assess if the increase is reasonable and beneficial for taxpayers.
2024 Fire department budget new line item for consultant fees $15,000. Also appears in other department budgets. Why are consultants needed all of a sudden?
2024 Fire department budget $1,000 for long service pins. Almost 50% of firefighter work-related deaths occur as a result of heart-related episodes The need is to retire earlier before they are so out of shape they kill themselves, not stay longer.
Human resources budget for long service pins $10,000? Actual expenditures in 2022 $4,805; 2023 - $3,202. Over budgeted and an out-of-date practice.
Instead of adding colourful graphics to the report, which offer little in the way of content or helpful info, include more explanations for the various line-item changes. Previous year's budgets going back to 2020 were more informative in this regard. Reduces the need for some explanations.
What is the anticipated increase in salaries that is built into this year’s budget? At almost 50% of the entire budget, this is a line item that has definitely gotten out of hand. Get a listing of employee groups (% for various unions and departments)
Explain the note in the 2023 Clerk’s Department budget for election year. Are the two AA’s employees or do they represent the additions to be made during an election year? If they are regular employees whose salaries are included in the budget what is the reasoning of the note regarding elections being copied and pasted from previous years?
There is no purpose in spending time and effort on calculating and charging various departments with internal overhead. It has no effect on the tax levy and provides no useful information that is beneficial to taxpayers. This goes for the administrative and vehicle usage charges. Outside of the water department which requires a charge for these items for regulation purposes, its benefit for other departments is non-existent. The same applies to bank charges. What benefit is it to taxpayers to know that the customer service dept has a $10,000 bank charge line-item while the fleet dept’s charge is zero? How would one even apportion bank charges in any equitable way?
Memberships and subscriptions – Check total yearly expense and explain the benefits to taxpayers of this expense
The information systems department salaries 2024 budget increase is listed at 6.08%. The increase in compensation costs since 2022 is 34% and 46% since 2021. Is nobody interested in getting an explanation for this on behalf of taxpayers? How about looking at the time tickets for these 13 employees to see how their time is being spent? Are these wage levels consistent with the private sector? All the internal and outside agency revenue items, except the Battalion, are paid by taxpayers so their actual cost is $2.9 million per year. There was no line item in the 2023 consultant fees. However, the 2024 budget indicates the 2023 budget was $85,000 with the 2024 budget being $75,000. There is no explanation for this altering of the 2023 budget figures. To the casual reader, this action appears to represent a $10,000 reduction in the line expense when in fact it is a $75,000 increase. This is the reason, as noted above, that apportionment of internal expenses which does not affect the final levy is not conducive to highlighting yearly departmental cost increases.
The Financials Expenses department salary section is a complete mystery and appears to end up in 2024 with a cost to taxpayers of $135,866, including benefits, for one employee whose title is Assessment & Real Estate Specialist. Is anyone interested in exploring what this job entails and the benefits it provides to taxpayers?
General revenues 2023 budget contained a $370,000 transfer from reserves which is missing in the comparable 2023 budget figures in the 2024 budget document. No explanation that I can see.
Mayor's budget has increased by $30,000 or 15% to $230,189. This includes a $9,000 line item for “Other employee allowances”. What guarantees does council have that this additional expenditure has any chance of being beneficial for taxpayers?
The 2023 budget of the Office of the CAO compensation has increased contained two line items 2672 - $8,900 and 470 - $2,700 that were not included in the 2024 budget report. No explanation.
The 2024 environmental dept budget includes a transfer to reserve funds of $397,370 which brings that amount to $1.2 million over the last three years. My understanding is that this amount represents the supposed savings realized from bringing the landfill operations in-house. The fact that this is being collected for future expenses and not for the benefit of current taxpayers is one thing and the fact that these purely ethereal savings are not being passed on to current taxpayers is another.
