Mayor Bob Chiarelli uses a very different tone of voice when he promises tax freezes on the campaign trail, than he does when outlining a draft budget that will cut $109 million from city services.
But perhaps it should all sound the same, because his promises have become the reason for this ugly lack of revenue.
The draft budget introduced to the public last week shows just how much has to be eliminated when only program and service cuts are used to make up for a huge budget shortfall.
City council finds itself mired in a deep rut which, for obvious reasons, it wants to extricate itself from as quickly as possible. But this budget is looking for an easy escape from a horrendously complex situation — and is leaving very little “city” behind.
What is a city if it cannot provide waste removal services for commercial businesses or for residential yard waste? Or if it cannot keep parks and green spaces tidy? Or if it cannot paint crosswalks, or keep its libraries open?
Do Ottawa residents want to give up in one document affordable housing programs, services for isolated seniors, crisis intervention provisions, and arts and heritage development, to make up for years of fiscal mismanagement?
The financial challenges city hall is facing cannot be remedied in one year and they cannot be solved by service cuts alone.
If Chiarelli and the city councillors insist on tax freezes, individual residents may save money, but the social cost will affect us all.
What the city needs now is a level-headed combination of tax increases and service cuts: and a touch of patience.
In fact, some of the pre-budget public consultations, indicated that many residents were willing to pay higher taxes if it meant preserving needed services.
But, as it stands, this draft budget is unacceptably cutting essential services for many people. For example, some of the changes will mean that low-income citizens will have to struggle for dental care, or for assistive devices such as wheelchairs. Fire stations will be closed. The cost of bus passes will rise.
Cuts like these will only diminish the quality of living the mayor keeps bragging about.
Much more thought must be put into prioritizing which services the city is unwilling to give up for the good of its citizens. Public health and financial assistance programs must take precedence over footbridges spanning the canal.
And everyone needs to understand this nasty “below 0” will take a few years to remedy.
Because if the response to this draft budget shows anything, it is that there are some things we are unwilling to give up in the name of saving dollars on tax.
—Colleen Dane