With budget cuts in the Township of Langley set to impact all residents in order to maintain his campaign promise of a zero-based budget (no property tax increase for 3 years), is Mayor Green setting this Township up for long-term failure and deterioration?The mayor's finance committee has been pouring over the budget for things that could be cut. All department directors have been asked to bring forth lean budgets that will allow various proposed projects to drop off the list. Even the Langley RCMP has dropped some new initiatives off the list of funded projects for 2009. Does the taxpayer understand that zero-based budgets in other communities have simply meant that various projects that should be tackled this year will simply be deferred in order for us to realize no property taxes? Do that understand that at a future date these projects will have to be accomplished to combat crumbling infrastructure?
Are all of these infrastructure project deferrals really wise in our Township as the federal government is announcing a massive availability of funds for municipalities who can contribute towards the projects? This could be the single most important opportunity for our community to get the much-needed infrastructure that will serve ourt projected growth from 100,000 people to almost 200,000 over the next 10-15 years. We may never see a federal program anywhere near the size of this in our lifetime.
Of course, Mayor Green could seek to borrow this money and put the TOL into debt to cover this project fund-matching, thereby creating a zero-based budget in theory only. Will we as a growing community reject the goose that lays the golden eggs or will we get goosed for going Green?
18 comments:
Dear Editor,
For the "Record" :) ~ On average, how much would it cost to keep things status-quo in the Township?
In other words, can you give a rough estimate (in dollars per year) of how much it would cost each family if we kept the current budget without any overhauls?
Thanks!
There is no such thing as "stus-quo" because you must understand that each department has projects that could be REQUIRED for public safety (road improvements, sanitation, etc.) and also the contractual wage increases. Until the new finance committee works its numbers and then council drafts something up, we have no idea right now. But we will post it when we have it. One must also understand that this is a municipality and not a business where you can hold the line on all spending and make various cuts. We can tell you that up to 87% of the budget is for salaries.
Also, cost per family is not possible to calculate as people are taxes on their property and that varies. Also, many budget items get funded through DCC's, reserve fund, land reserve and borrowing and none of those sources are property taxes.
In 2008 in the Township, a family with a home assessed at $500K paid $2,111 of which $1,373 was for general property taxes, $145 for garbage collection, $302 for water, $291 for sewer. Does this help?
“Are all of these infrastructure project deferrals really wise in our Township as the federal government is announcing a massive availability of funds for municipalities who can contribute towards the projects?”
I’m glad you brought up the fact that the infrastructure money for the feds must be matched, or contributed to, by the municipalities.
I’m sure you recall your recent post regarding the funding fiasco of the LEC. (http://langleyrecord.blogspot.com/2009/01/raging-bull-at-it-again.html)
Let me refresh you memory.
The last council decided to commence construction of the LEC BEFORE all the financing was in place. When their “hail mary” request to the feds didn’t materialize the township had to cough up 5 million dollars to finish the project. But you commented that the money came from a contingency fund set up for that purpose so it was no big deal. In actual fact, according to the local papers, that 5 million dollars came out of an emergency fund that was NOT specifically set up for the LEC cost overruns.
And now the chickens have come home to roust for your pals. The “rainy day” money has been used to cover a shortfall in LEC funding so that money is NOT available for this infrastructure spending. Had the TOL followed proper business practices on the LEC they would have ensured that ALL financing was in place prior to construction and there would NOT have been a shortfall. And that 5 million dollars would be matched by the feds for further projects..
No wonder Bateman fought so hard to try and pin this on Warawa. He obviously saw the infrastructure situation looming on the horizon. No amount of Patullo Bridge photo ops are going to help him.
You can try and pin this on Green and the current council (although most of the current council members were also on the last council) but the facts are that this “die” was cast long before Green came on the scene.
Nice try though.
Horny Toad
Apples vs. oranges. There are many, many Federal grant and loan programs and each have their own requirements. You guys just can't let go of the LEC. Mayor Raging Bull thinks he found an anomaly and as he can't find anything else, he must constantly talk about LEC. But it is all to his peril, as the majority of Langley support it. Nice try HT.
Maybe if we do a post on the sewer program you can find a way to also inject LEC? The bully got the last word in (because that is his nature) with Brian Lewis. Now HT is trying to top that. LOL!
In these times - we ALL have to cut back and reaccess our spending. Individuals and Corporations. I applaud the responsible behavior of Rick Green - so that our kids dont have to pay for our expenditures. EVERYTHING and EVERYPROGRAM should be re-accessed. I urge you to support your new administration. The times of partisan politics is OVER. We ALL need to pull together for the good of the economy
Catherine D
Apples vs. oranges."
Hardly. Taxpayers money, no matter what bin it is put into still comes from the same source, the taxpayer. And when it is wasted, as it was with the LEC, the taxpayer remembers, especially when tax increases are announced.
No matter how desperate you are for the LEC financing fiasco to go away by saying "that’s in the past" or "that was then and this is now" the fact of the matter is that 5 million dollars of my (and others) money is gone and that money will have to be replaced (again by me and other taxpayers) to use for other projects in the future (like the just- announced stimulus projects).
But you ARE right that the majority of Langley supports the LEC, they are just "pi**ed off" that taxpayers money was wasted when it didn't have to be.
As far as sewer post is concerned it seems to me that when it comes to your constant smearing of Green all your posts are "sewer" posts.
But perhaps you could zero in on how your bud, Bateman, always seems to be "johnny on the spot" when a reporter or cameraman is present. He is like the "ambulance chaser" of politicians.
Horny Toad
Yes HT, let's just rip up cheques from other orders of government and bit off our noses to spite our faces. WRONG that the LEC caused a property tax increase announcement, it was CUPE wage increases that basically required a 5% increase. Would you rather live in Vancouver with a 9% proposed increase or perhaps Langley City at 6.89% proposed? Please take off the Green coloured glasses Horny, as this line of thought is illogical my friend.
The other blog does a good job of zeroing in on Bateman and formerly Kurt Alberts. They inject those two into every post. Looks like this blog's approach just get's under your skin because we are doing with the opposition to progressive Langley what those guys do to try and make us a welfare community? Jordan Bateman takes on the issues and that is what we pay him to do. We have all seen your ambulance chaser analogy and its just plain silly. Wake up and smell the coffee HT! Your pal Green is going to cook his own goose! There are no sewer posts, but the truth hurts my friend.
CD: Flowery Green love fest comments aside, the Township is not a small family nor a business. It cannot send its well-qualified staff packing without significant costs and expertise. It cannot reduce the inventory of widgets to keep costs low.
Unlike a business, the Township must watch things like public safety, the safety of our 1,000 km. of roads, etc., or risk loss of life, litigation, etc. Also unlike a private business or family, the Township can get significant grant monies from other orders of government to pay a significant portion of these costs. So, you favour us ripping the cheques up now and then raising property taxes significantly after your Mayor Green leaves office in order for him to look good, is that it? Please re-think this position CD. You are asking for danger here and lives can be put a risk from Mayor Green's approach, if he were to go down that road with this budget.
CD - leave a legacy for future generations, what don't you get about the future generation! THEY WILL PAY and BIG TIME for a 0/0/0. The infrastrucure projects , rec. facilities needed (e.g. Rec. Centre in Aldergrove or a new museum or?. or ?) don't get cheaper than 2009 dollars especially with partnership funding opportunites. They are needed and in 2015 dollars they will cost incrementaly more so your son/daughter will just have to pay more with no support from other partners - dumb short-sighted thinking folks!
Geez HT, always with the LEC comparisons. We get it - you're furious over the LEC funding, you have a strong disliking for Bateman and speak of the Mayor as if the sun shines directly out his as$. This Mayor will be judged by taxpayers for his actions. What actions? How about creating duplicate committees, handing consulting jobs to to his friends, and publicly attacking members of his council in an unprofessional manner.
Everyone can agree - nobody wants taxes to go up. The question is at what cost? Deferring infrastructure projects may only add to the cost in the end; it's cheaper to maintain than to rebuild. Infrastructure MUST keep up with population growth and the Mayor should put the needs of this growing community above the needs of his campaign promises.
"Yes HT, let's just rip up cheques from other orders of government and bit off our noses to spite our faces."
I don't recall saying not to accept cheques from other order of government. What I did say, in relation to the stimulus money talked about in the budget, is that it requires the municipality to put up money as well and because 5 million of that money was squandered by your buddies it is no longer available for these projects. So if we want to take part in these programs we are have to come up with some money as no senior government seems to want to finance these programs 100%. Surely even you can see that. And this isn't any defence of Green, this is placing the blame where it belongs- on the shoulders of the last council and in particular the BIG SPEBDER, Kurt Alberts.
"Unlike a business, the Township must watch things like public safety, the safety of our 1,000 km. of roads, etc., or risk loss of life, litigation, etc"
But does the township have to buy golf courses, riverfront restaurants etc. And how many people benefited from the EXTRA expense of building an "olympic size pool" vs. a regular pool.
But keep on proposing the "extravagant" pojects . Whether they are in 2009 dollars or 2015 dollars they are still extravagant and unnecessary.
Horny toad
What is the total price of the LEC HT? What did the TOL put in and what did other partners put up?
Municipalities buy lands all the time and in-camera they have reasons for the purchases. These lands will be seen as a great bargain by future TOL generations and that is what some of it is all about. Kurt Alberts in our opinion, made wise investments that this mayor cannot comprehend. The witch hunt has not unvailed anything HT.
Editor, please correct the numbers below as needed. It's the essence of sustainability that I am trying to convey.
Regarding infrastructure and our future generations ~ specifically the rail overpass funding for 64th/#10 Hwy ~ Translink, the Province and the Feds are all kicking in $47M to make this happen, correct?The number of trains going through Langley are going to rise by 12 per day within the next 7 years, correct?Langley's population will also rise from our current 100K people to 168K people in the next decade, correct? Delta Port has no intention of changing its plan, correct?
Bottom line: We can accept these (many) dollars & work with our partners to build some meaningful transportation infrastructure.Or, we can reject the money, ignore the problem & pretend we won't need this infrastructure in the future.
Yes ~ we can put our head in the sand & not spend money today. But, please be clear, this is not "saving money". In fact, it is a very selfish move on our part as it promotes no sustainability whatsoever for our future generations. We leave them with a big transportation problem and a MASSIVE bill in 10 years.
Join the discussions/Open Houses this Saturday or next Monday:
http://www.tol.bc.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2210&Itemid=677
"What is the total price of the LEC HT? What did the TOL put in and what did other partners put up?"
Off the top of my head I'm not sure of the numbers and I don't have time right now to look up information that you already know so why don’t you enlighten us.
As for Kurt (THE BIG SPENDER)Alberts, you are confusing "wise investments" with investments you can afford. Right now in my area there is a property that is priced quite low and it would be a wise investment as when the economy comes back this property will be worth a fortune. HOWEVER, I can't afford to buy it.
That is the same with Alberts and his "wise investments". Look at the golf course. His idea of a buffer zone between residential and business was probably a good idea. But the money spent could have been put to better use.
Same with the waterfront restaurant property. Sure, its nice to have the TOL own the waterfront along the river from a-b BUT, again it cost money. Money that could probably have gone to better use in the TOL.
Take the olympic size swimming pool. Why was it necessary to make it olympic size and all the expense that entails? I read in the paper that some "olympic bound" local swimmer just thought it was wonderful. I’m happy for her.But that was one out of how many thousand swimmers. Was the added expense worth it? Will we be getting an influx of olympic hopefuls moving her for training in this pool? I doubt it.
HT
In all fairness to Mr. Ken Baker we would like to point out that our Township Hall watchdog says that during a meeting of the new Finance Committee formed by Mayor Green, Mr. Baker himself admitted that he did not have any great degree of experience in municipal accounting practices.
Out of all of the public Finance Committee members, we believe that Mr. Baker possesses a degree of financial knowledge and personal integrity that could lead him to conclude that the witch hunt was unsuccessful and the budgets of the past have been reasonable. We are putting our money on Mr. Baker being brutally honest with the taxpayers on these points. He ha been active in the community and we think he will not let his reputation suffer for the sake of making another person look good. But time will tell.
John Sholtens built the Walnut Grove pool, not Kurt Alberts.
Tricky Ricky speaks out of both sides of his mouth. He says he wants no taxes but that he won't have to cut service to do it. That will soon be put to the test, and Tricky Ricky will fail. We will either pay more now or lose services we rely on.
Horny Toad is your typical short sighted, selfish, live for today type who doesn't give a damn about the future of Langley as long as he has a toonie in his jeans. Unfortunately for Langley's kids his self important b.s. is shared by Mayor Raging Bull.
Post a Comment