“Ask the people in Chilliwack the last time they had a Tragically Hip concert,” he (Mayor Peary) said.
Why would any Chilliwack council, councillor or taxpayer want to be so financially irresponsible and foolish?
Particularly when just an easy twenty minute drive down Highway 1 in Abbotsford is a council and councillors willing not only to burden their taxpayers with the highest per-household debt load in the lower mainland but to subsidise tickets to the tune of $100 per posterior in a seat.
Any resident of Chilliwack with any common sense would be happy to keep their city’s debt at $0, leave Abbotsford groaning under the burden of the highest per-household debt in the lower mainland, take the $100 per person seat subsidy paid for by Abbotsford’s beleaguered taxpayers and drive to Abbotsford to see the Hip.
Tragically, being fiscally responsible is behaviour that Abbotsford’s council and councillors seem unable to grasp.
While there is a certain truth in the mayors statement “If you’re going to borrow money, the time to do that is when rates are low” common sense should tell you that it does not matter how good the interest rate is, if you borrow an amount large enough debt repayment will have a significant negative effect on finances and financial health.
Borrow an amount sufficiently large to negatively impact finances and financial health and you have to raise taxes, levies and fees and/or cut costs by reducing services.
If you are going to borrow money, whatever the interest rate, you need to understand and consider what effect repayment will have on cash flow and finances.
And just what is the point of speaking of previous councils borrowing money at 8% or even 10% when that debt was paid off?
“said Peary, adding that previous councils had aggressively paid off debt at the expense of updating services”
Previous councils did not update services in order to pay off debt. As opposed to this council which, to pay off debt, is cutting services. And Mayor Peary favours the current councils approach – why?
“Peary said despite the Frontier Centre’s numbers, previous councils’ decisions to take Abbotsford into the big leagues are in the past and the city’s investments are trumping any neighbour’s ability to poo-poo the debt load.”
Reading the above followed by “”Ask the people in Chilliwack the last time they had a Tragically Hip concert” one is left expecting to hear nya-nya-nya-nya nyhaaaa.
Apparently, rather than a capable and thoughtful city council, Abbotsford is being run by a group with more in common with a group of ten year olds.
A group of 10 year olds that has, sadly, saddled Abbotsford with the highest per-household debt in the lower mainland, so they can boast ‘mine’s bigger than yours’. Although this need for ego projects does go a long way towards explaining councils Plan A at any cost attitude.
While the cost of cleaning up all the unfavourable fallout that results from these unwise decisions and actions rouses exasperation even ire, the Mayor’s words “previous councils’ decisions to take Abbotsford into the big leagues” tend to evoke pity.
For it is something to be pitied that council thinks one can buy a city into ‘the big leagues’; that what makes for a first class city is merely structures and facilities; that accumulating the right list of possessions makes a city ‘big league.
I am not saying that infrastructure is not important; what I am saying is that it is not big ego projects that are important in a first rate city but items such as streets that do not devour tires or car suspensions and that you can safely drive at night because you can see the line markings or neatness of appearance as opposed to Abbotsford’s “look[ing] a little scruffier, with less street sweeping, less grooming of parks and city flower beds and reduced bylaw enforcement.”
Any council can build monuments to their egos as long as the are willing to abandon common sense and fiscal responsibility and crush citizens under debt and ever climbing taxes, levies and fees, while cutting services.
What makes a city a City of Note is not constructed of concrete but is constructed of intangibles and character.
A reputation for/as a good place to do business (not as a bureaucratic nightmare); sound financial management (not as a debt ridden black hole insatiably consuming taxpayer dollars); maintaining infrastructure (not as a city whose infrastructure is falling apart from lack of maintenance or needed investment); as a place where all can afford to participate in sports and fitness (not for fees so high increasing numbers of children and citizens simply cannot afford to participate).
Councils ill-advised decisions were not “decisions to take Abbotsford into the big leagues” but decisions that have made Abbotsford less liveable and reinforced the city’s reputation, outside of the legend that exists only in the ‘council think’ of councils minds, as ‘the hick city in the country’.