Thoughts on the Resignations of the Mayor's Finance Committee
The three citizen members of the Mayor's Standing Committee on Finance resigned last week, we learned from the Mayor yesterday. While I thank these volunteers for their time and energy, I have to admit that I'm disappointed that the Mayor put them into a totally unworkable position.
You don't build trust by having secret, closed-door meetings. Sadly, the Mayor made several unilateral decisions which damaged the ability of that committee to work. Whether it was trying to eject Coun. Ward from one of their meetings, or holding closed-door sessions in his office without inviting Coun. Ferguson (a member of that committee appointed by the Mayor), or meeting secretly with the three citizens right into this year without Councillors Richter and Ferguson (both duly-appointed members) present, it's disappointing that this kind of leadership and direction was shown.
After last year's budget process, some of us on Council tried to find a better way to work with the Committee, suggesting that joint Finance Committee-Council Priorities Committee meetings might be the way to go to save duplication of work and briefings by staff and to give the citizens a better feel for what Council was thinking. That didn't happen. Finance Committee meetings only come by call of the Mayor, and he chose not to call any official ones.
The Committee's 2009 budget report was considered carefully by Council and, speaking for myself, I found it to be unsupportable. The Mayor's plan would have gutted capital spending (0 by 2011). We couldn't have filled a pothole! The committee's recommendations would have put the Township into a $770,000 deficit this year, and $6.4 million by 2013, with no mention or plan on how to fund that deficit, beyond a vague recommendation (a wage freeze) that would have meant ripping up fairly- and regionally-negotiated contracts with CUPE and the IAFF. Even doing that wouldn't have balanced the books for what they were suggesting.
Just to get to that deficit level, the Mayor's plan hinged on taking capital money out of the user-pay utilities (water, sewer and solid waste). This would have opened us up to a huge number of potential breach-of-contract legal actions by our own residents.
In their letter, the citizens express displeasure with the Township's budgeting process. I don't find the budget process convoluted or difficult. We receive hours of briefings, plenty of printed material, and staff are always helpful and responsive when we request specific details or information on the narrowest points. Indeed, our process is consistent with what other communities throughout the region do.
The bottom line is that Langley needs leadership and communication on these issues, not politicking and secret meetings. I'm disappointed the Mayor didn't seek to include Council, but instead chose to exclude us from the process with this committee. Council doesn't have the authority or ability to call Finance Committee meetings, dictate how it meets, create its terms of reference, or develop its agenda--the chair of that committee (the Mayor) does. I think better communication and inclusive leadership would have led to a more productive experience for that group. It's unfortunate that the three have resigned, but I (like the rest of Council via a motion last night) thank Misters Patterson, Luciani and Baker for their time and service.
You don't build trust by having secret, closed-door meetings. Sadly, the Mayor made several unilateral decisions which damaged the ability of that committee to work. Whether it was trying to eject Coun. Ward from one of their meetings, or holding closed-door sessions in his office without inviting Coun. Ferguson (a member of that committee appointed by the Mayor), or meeting secretly with the three citizens right into this year without Councillors Richter and Ferguson (both duly-appointed members) present, it's disappointing that this kind of leadership and direction was shown.
After last year's budget process, some of us on Council tried to find a better way to work with the Committee, suggesting that joint Finance Committee-Council Priorities Committee meetings might be the way to go to save duplication of work and briefings by staff and to give the citizens a better feel for what Council was thinking. That didn't happen. Finance Committee meetings only come by call of the Mayor, and he chose not to call any official ones.
The Committee's 2009 budget report was considered carefully by Council and, speaking for myself, I found it to be unsupportable. The Mayor's plan would have gutted capital spending (0 by 2011). We couldn't have filled a pothole! The committee's recommendations would have put the Township into a $770,000 deficit this year, and $6.4 million by 2013, with no mention or plan on how to fund that deficit, beyond a vague recommendation (a wage freeze) that would have meant ripping up fairly- and regionally-negotiated contracts with CUPE and the IAFF. Even doing that wouldn't have balanced the books for what they were suggesting.
Just to get to that deficit level, the Mayor's plan hinged on taking capital money out of the user-pay utilities (water, sewer and solid waste). This would have opened us up to a huge number of potential breach-of-contract legal actions by our own residents.
In their letter, the citizens express displeasure with the Township's budgeting process. I don't find the budget process convoluted or difficult. We receive hours of briefings, plenty of printed material, and staff are always helpful and responsive when we request specific details or information on the narrowest points. Indeed, our process is consistent with what other communities throughout the region do.
The bottom line is that Langley needs leadership and communication on these issues, not politicking and secret meetings. I'm disappointed the Mayor didn't seek to include Council, but instead chose to exclude us from the process with this committee. Council doesn't have the authority or ability to call Finance Committee meetings, dictate how it meets, create its terms of reference, or develop its agenda--the chair of that committee (the Mayor) does. I think better communication and inclusive leadership would have led to a more productive experience for that group. It's unfortunate that the three have resigned, but I (like the rest of Council via a motion last night) thank Misters Patterson, Luciani and Baker for their time and service.
posted by Jordan Bateman @ 1:03 PM
