After half a dozen budget meetings, city councillors have made few decisions but they have been busy making motions that will come up for debate starting next week.
Councillors have so far made about 14 motions that would affect capital spending with another 27 motions on the operating side.
The capital motions have identified $3.1 million worth of cost reductions and $731,000 in desired extra spending, for a net reduction of $2.4 million.
On the operational side, where the city spends most of its money, councillors have identified $900,000 worth of cuts while seeking to add $422,000 worth of new spending, for a net savings of $478,000.
Hawks vs. spenders
Coun. Cam MacKay has led the charge on the capital side, identifying $2.7 million worth of projects he thinks should be cut.
MacKay said there are a number of infrastructure projects that were funded in past years but not completed. He thinks it's time to free that money from reserves and put it toward city operations, to lower the property tax burden on residents.
"There was a fair bit of debate as to whether you can do this or not, so we'll see if it passes," he said.
Coun. Wes Brodhead has emerged as the biggest spender, putting forward four motions that would cost the city a total of $332,200 if approved. Brodhead made one motion on the capital side to fund an anti-train-whistle project for Meadowview Drive, which would cost $250,000 if implemented. He's made three motions that would increase operational spending by a total of $82,200.
Brodhead said he's not out to spend money but if there are projects that have merit it's council's duty to ensure the city has the appropriate funds.
"If we're going to artificially say we're not going to fund the corporation, what happens is we pass on that obligation to next year or to the next council or to the next generation," he said.
Brodhead made a cost-saving motion to reduce the use of casual staff but it didn't factor into the Gazette's math as it didn't specify a dollar value.
Active mayor
Mayor Nolan Crouse has been the most active at filing motions. He's put forward nine in total on the plus side of the ledger and eight on the negative side.
If all his ideas passed, the city would cut $250,000 worth of capital projects but add $300,000, for a net spending increase of $50,000.
On the operational side, Crouse has identified $548,000 worth of programs for cutting but wants to add $165,000 worth of projects, for a net saving of $383,000.
Crouse said there's been so many motions to add and subtract funding that he's lost any sense of council's general direction.
Council is scheduled to finalize the budget at its Dec. 20 meeting.
At some point near the end of the process, administration will break out the "budget barometer" that shows the property tax impact of every decision being contemplated. Crouse said he likes to leave that step out of the equation for as long as possible.
"What I want people to do is make decisions based on good planning for the community," he said.
The budget proposed by city administration would require a residential property tax hike of 3.6 per cent and would see the city spend $132 million for operations and $14.6 million on capital projects.
$ value of council motions Effect on bottom line (negative = cost to city)
Total capital spending $2.5 million
Total operational spending $478,100
Operational spending cuts
(by council member)
Nolan Crouse $382,700
Cam MacKay $7,600
Wes Brodhead -$82,200
Cathy Heron $19,000
Malcolm Parker -$75,000
Roger Lemieux $3,700
Len Bracko -$25,000
