St. Albert’s new city council will plunge headfirst into its first challenge of the term on Monday when the 2011 operating and 2011-13 capital budgets are released. No details have been shared about what the budget means for next year’s property tax hit, however given the amount of attention paid to municipal spending during last month’s election, there will be significant pressure to keep spending in check and, for some councillors, to follow through on campaign promises.
During an editorial board meeting with the Gazette, Mayor Nolan Crouse hinted the budget will pose its share of challenges for the new council, almost half of which is comprised of newcomers. He doesn’t see a lot of fat to trim from the operational side, which we do know is strained to some degree due to union wage settlements and non-union salary demands. If the new council is going to do some trimming, Crouse says, it could be on the capital side where draft numbers show $160 million in projects over the next three years — only $50 million of which are on the funded list. The mayor delivered a stark truth by saying, “I just don’t see us being able to afford the dreams that are out there.”
Given such a significant divide between wants and needs, there will be extra pressure on council members who made tax and spending promises during the election campaign. Len Bracko and Cam MacKay stand out as the only two elected candidates who promised to cap property taxes at no more than 1.5 per cent. Given that target is about half of last year’s relatively modest 2.9 per cent tax hike, both councillors will need to sharpen their pencils and keep their calculators on standby to find as many ways to save as possible. Whatever ideas they come up with must of course win over a majority of council, so they need to be well reasoned and not just arbitrary spending cuts. If that sounds like a tall order, it is, but we wish both the best of luck to ease the ever-growing budget burden of St. Albert taxpayers.
Crouse is another council member who set himself up for increased scrutiny this budget season after promising an “efficiency review” at city hall. It’s still unclear what this ‘review’ will accomplish, if in fact council as a group decides it should even happen. Crouse is adamant about challenging convention to ensure each department spends money as efficiently as possible, although this week said he doesn’t see the need for a formal third-party review.
This raises questions about whether council is prepared to delve deeper into the numbers or if the review is more pep talk than substance, especially when department and division heads at city hall are already in the habit of challenging spending during budget preparations. As it stands this review sounds like an idea borne to allay fiscal concerns during an election campaign where zero-based budgeting was the topic du jour. That’s good electioneering, however it provides little comfort to taxpayers. Election promises are meaningless without some pressure to follow through, and the pressure only goes up from here.
