Committee Moves To Cut Capital Spending

File Photo By Roxanne Ashe - Visual Interiors Photography

Is the proposed Five Year Capital Budget of $243 million affordable and sustainable was the subject of a debate at Budget Committee and in the end it meant cuts but not to the Operating Budget side of the equation.

In the pre-amble to his motion to cut deep in to the proposed Five Year Capital Budget Councilor Chris Warren spoke about the entire budget process and how little had seemingly changed.

“I have been thinking a lot about this budget process for three years now and it hasn’t gotten any easier,” said Councillor Warren/

Priority based budgeting was suppose to be a “re-think of previous spending programs and living within our means.” he said.

Council Warren stated that in the next five years despite a discussed infrastructure levy raising $7 million over five years there was still the requirement to borrow $75 million. In the first five years there would be repayment of $31 million in five years. Most of the initial five years of repayments in the next five years would be in interest.

“I don’t think this is affordable and sustainable for a city our size,” he said going on to give the example of how Moose Jaw would be spending 70 percent of what Regina would be spending in the same five years with the Queen City having seven times the population. The capital spending was projected to be four times greater than 10 years ago he said.

Council Warren called for a reduction of $42 million in the proposed Five Year Capital Budget to $200 million in spending including the 2019 carryover amount. Carryover is the budget funds for projects not competed in the previous year’s construction season.

“Not getting the work done to me is not sustainable,” Councilor Heather Eby stated.

“Previous to getting cast iron started in 2016 there had not been a project of this magnitude in the City of Moose Jaw,” Councilor Eby stated, adding “we don]t want to go back to the days to vote against projects because the people of Moose Jaw don’t like that.”

“(We need to) be very careful in paring back capital budget as it is all critical.”

Councilor Crystal Froese said the motion would allow Budget Committee to look at carryover funds.

She called for a review because “we cannot write a cheque you cannot afford to cash.”

Councilor Brian Swanson said Council was in a situation not of their making.

“We are in a situation that is very grave. The idea of going back to Administration and say get us out of here….there is no magic solution. There is no rabbit to be pulled out of a hat by Administration,” Councilor Swanson stated,

He spoke about how he fought against expenditures in new recreational facilities and want to see core infrastructure addressed but was the lone voice of dissent on the project.

“We have inherited a mess…my position is we have to reallocate funds from the Operating Budget to capital expenditures,” Councilor Swanson stated.

Councilor Dawn Luhning said the entire issue was frustrating.

“To be fair to the motion that was passed we received tonight with the eight percent reduction and I cannot understand (that)…we are all over the place. I don’t think its helpful for Administration and our community.”

Councilor Luhining also spoke about her opposition to recreation facilities and how they had “pushed out necessary capital improvements.”

“We need to find ways in our operating budget to cut back whether we like it or not…to nickel and dime the Capital Budget is the wrong thing to do…we don’t want to touch the Operating Budget and leave it there.”

Councilor Chris Warren went on to defend his motion stating Budget Committee had to look at a “pot of money that we feel is affordable.”

He went on to state that in the last 10 years if only inflation was met it would mean just $87 million in additional costs.

“I will not look at it as cutting but I will look at it as right sizing,” Councilor Warren stated.

Mayor Frasier Tolmie came out backing the motion.

“We are actually creating a backlog for work we can actually do,” Mayor Tolmie stated, adding “we need to find the sweet spot for our community and what’s affordable.”

Councilor Eby asked how long it would take to receive a report back on the potential effects and how it would affect the completion of the budget.

City Manager Jim Puffalt said it would take a month and it would not affect the budget timeline adversely,

“I think we have some time to take a look at this,” Puffalt said.

Councilor Swanson opposed the writing of the report as wasteful and done before.

“If this was the first time we discussed this I would have more sympathy but all these reports have been discussed before,” he said.

Mayor Tolmoe seemingly took personal offense to Councilor Swanson’s comments.

“I don’t understand the last comment from Councilor Swanson because we had an eight percent cut discussed….if you (Councilor Swanson) had an idea where eight percent should have come from you should have done it yourself instead of asking Administration,” Mayor Tolmie said going on to defend other members of Council as bringing forth what he believed were good options.

The motion was passed 5 - 2 with Councilors Luhning and Swanson opposed.