Thank you to staff for the work done over the past many months to bring this Financial Plan forward this evening.  And thank you to those who came tonight to speak to Council.

Each year, Victoria raises through taxes over $300 million to run this city.

The citizens of Victoria expect us to assess the budget and to consult with experts and citizens when making decisions.

It is Council’s duty to spend this money wisely through careful reflection and consultation with citizens and experts.

I want to be clear on several points.

First, we were not permitted adequate time to review and assess this budget, or to review the financial requirements of the City, prior to many decisions being made. This is an example of an opaque process leading to an outcome that leaves citizens baffled and many angry.  

Second, the proposed tax increase: While the initially proposed tax increase of 8.37% with a proposed 5-year compounded tax raise of 53% was too high, so too is the current proposed 7.93% increase.

Third, this Council is not listening to taxpayers.  We know the public’s view through a Staff budget engagement in 2023. An Ipsos survey was part of that process.  Through the IPSOS survey, we learned that while 84% of Victorians rated their Quality of Life “good”, 63% thought it had worsened in the past 3 years.  We were also clearly told that Victorians preferred to see reduced services rather than tax hikes. 

The high number of letters to the editor and emails and submissions about Centennial Square suggest that the public expects a pull-back on nonessential expenditures and especially “vanity” projects. The public wants the City to tackle significant infrastructure issues that have been ignored for many years.

Fourth, we have to stop “Program Creep”. And we need to develop a mechanism to stop it.  Early in our term, a Councillor asked for support for a particular organization.  Since it wasn’t a proper ‘ask’, a motion was created for a grant program which would serve that type of organization.  Thus, a new program was created.

Council, not staff, must identify programs to be eliminated.  If Council wants a new program, perhaps Council should first choose one to be eliminated.

Fifth, delayed maintenance costs. We are all aware of the deterioration of our roadways and the aging of the City’s infrastructure.  This Council must now deal with the decisions of past Councils which deferred maintenance including under-road infrastructure.  Victoria is a Coastal City – and 20% of our retaining walls are at high risk of failure in the next decade or so.

Our outdoor spaces and urban forest are also in need of significant and costly upgrades. We cannot defer these expenses much longer.

Sixth, I must register my objection to BOLD and BOLDER.  And I am not talking just about Councillor remuneration.  Over the past few years, we have heard of crisis after crisis and emergency after emergency – most of which are beyond the City’s control to solve or end. 

We have received public comment about growth in administrative departments.  Sadly, that growth has been needed – and will continue as long as BOLD and BOLDER is Council’s cry.  The City, moving faster than even Provincial mandates, spends money on projects that should be funded by other levels of government.

BOLD changes invite challenges – and cost money.  Think of the challenge with respect to Beacon Hill Park during the height of the pandemic. 

I do not see Council’s role to be “BOLD”, running ahead of provincial or federal initiatives.  Our City has neither the capacity, nor the expertise, nor the financial resources to run ahead of the rest of BC, Canada, or the world.  

While housing, drug supply, and health delivery are beyond the City’s responsibility, associated expenditures have been incurred by the City, some of which are within the City’s purview, others outside.  

This needs to be tracked.  Recently the City requested that the province reimburse the City for an expense – but the City has to do more to recoup expenses related to the failure of other orders of government to respond to needs of those with mental health or addictions which render them unable to care for themselves.

GOING FORWARD:  We need a rethink. 

We need to examine our decision processes.  We need to embrace the objective of Council not allowing property tax to dramatically outpace inflation – we can start by returning to the past commitment to inflation plus one. We need to efficiently and transparently manage the City’s operating and capital budgets.

Victoria must go back to essentials, to our core responsibilities.

And we need to explore other sources of funding.  

We can start by evaluating our expenditures to regional groups which operate throughout the region but receive grants mainly from Victoria. 

Consider, from staff reports Victoria’s grants of $7.2M are 9 times those of Saanich.  The question must be asked. Are Victoria taxpayers financing regional organizations or activities or amenities that serve the region?  Is there real accountability and transparency?

While Victoria has been providing not-for-profits and many other groups draw from the City budget – we have seen elsewhere the suggestion that perhaps these groups should support the city rather than city support them. There are over 500 of these groups. 

Housing and health are of interest to Council, but both are the responsibility of the Provincial Government. We must better assess costs taken on due to the failure of the Province.

Final Comments:

•  taxes will increase more than inflation;
• we must end discussions of vanity projects and programs which serve groups which have a “champion” on Council.  As long as the public sees vanity projects and favorites, this Council’s budget will not be accepted;
• we need to have a hard look at our relationships with social agencies and other not-for-profits and
• we need to stay in our lane and push back on the Province and its agencies which need to fund and provide needed services throughout the region.
  
  

I was voted on City Council to be a champion for 4 things – safe streets, livable neighborhoods, respect for the taxpayers, and transparent governance.

This budget fails.  There was time room for public input between release of the draft plan and tonight. . .  and time to better evaluate where tax dollars would be best spent.  And we need more transparency of expenditures

I believe there is tax-room, areas to shave, if only a bit. Council has not supported transparency and not exercised fiscal prudence.  I do not support this Financial Plan