The November 21 special meeting of Morinville town council to consider the 2024 Operating budget had some tension between council and administration.
It was clear that council wanted to minimize spending hikes that will result in tax increases while administration stated the budget could not be decreased to the scenario levels directed by council earlier without being in breach of practices and policies set by council.
Here’s the essence of what council needs to consider.
The 2023 budget included $440,978 to be transferred to Reserves (basically a savings account for future use), however, the latest forecast shows the town will be able to transfer $2,731,690. That amounts to just under $2.3 million in taxes collected in 2023 that were not necessary to achieve the bottom line of the budget.
However, instead of holding the line on taxes to the 2023 level the administration brought in a budget that proposes increasing tax revenue from $11,887,617 in 2023 to $13,346,379 in 2024. That’s a 12% increase, and most of that increase will be through heavier taxation of existing development (especially commercial and industrial) because the budget is based on a 1.5% growth in assessment.
Council went into closed session so it cannot be confirmed, but the major sore point in the budget is the large increase in salaries, wages, benefits and training. This category of expenditure is expected to total $10,884,137 for 2023, but the budget for 2024 is over $12 million (even allowing $250,000 in savings from temporary vacancies).
Here’s the logical solution to the passive-aggressive dispute.
Council should not be directing the specific details of the town operations (that’s management’s responsibility). With a $2.3 million margin anticipated in the 2023 operations, council needs to direct administration to bring the 2024 budget back with no tax increase for residents, businesses or industry. The only increase in tax revenue should be the result of new assessment (new construction).
Administration must do as directed by council (even if it disagrees) and bring back any scenario requested. Administration can state that the scenario contravenes a specific practice or policy. It can be acknowledged that it would be much easier to run the town with a 12% increase in tax revenue in 2024. But that decision belongs to council, not administration.
As a governing body council needs to represent what they believe is in the best interests of electors and taxpayers — people who are their constituents, neighbours and community members.
It may be difficult for administration to have the town meet service standards without increasing 2024 spending by more than the $2.3 million margin expected this year, but ‘difficult’ is the reason the town has a highly paid CAO surrounded by a team of six-figure salaried managers.
Both the council and the CAO need to set the example for spending restraint.
The 2024 budget has a small increase in council costs. Cut that back to the 2023 level.
The CAO needs to put forward a streamlined operation starting at the top. There were eight town staff at the November 21 council meeting (there are only seven members of council).
Council is under-utilizing and undermining the CAO by directing its questions to other levels of management. If a department manager is needed to make a proposal or address a situation, they should do so then take questions from council and leave. Eliminate the image of one working while many observe. It’s not a good look if outside staff do it and a terrible look when management does it.
Taxpayers and residents need to call or email their council members if they oppose a budget that will bring in a tax hike. And so do those who support increasing spending by more than $2.3 million above the 2023 level.
Ed Cowley
Over the years I often wondered what the point was to electing a mayor and town council if they are just figureheads for the administration as it so often seemed. In his letter Mr Cowley does little to dispell that notion.