Newsletter March 27, 2021: Oak Bay is spending money in all the wrong places?
With the advent of the “Communications Specialist”, the Oak Bay News February 4th, 2021 edition painted a glowing report about the District’s infrastructure expenditures. It explained how the exceptionally high annual property tax increases of the last two years were used to raise replacement costs by 23% for Oak Bay’s pipes, roads and buildings.
However, the floods of December 2020 and January 2021 revealed a very different picture. All of the flooding clearly demonstrated just how bad the infrastructure crisis is. At the February 18, 2021 Council Meeting, in response to Councillor questions and residents distressed about their properties’ severe flooding due to the District’s “inadequate pipe capacity”, the Director of Engineering stated:
“It really comes down to a level of service question. If Council and residents need to see more happening, or accelerated rehabilitation happening, then that implies not only an increase in funding but an increase in staff.”
There is no argument that past Councils have let the infrastructure deficit increase and underfunded improvement. In fact, three of the present Council members voted against a past Council’s majority approved resolution that did just that: the infrastructure was underfunded by transferring infrastructure reserve funding to hide spending on their own agenda items.
What is now apparent however is, that from 2015 to 2020 the District’s leadership added over $1,000,000 to the annual budget for new administration staff. If the cost of new support staff and consultant contracts are added, then the total amount exceeds an annual 5.1% annual property tax increase.
A current Council member had this to say about the May 1, 2015 Oak Bay News (OBN) headline and article announcing the first (5.1%) of a series of excessive property tax increases. “I agree the increases are exceptional high (adding, especially in Oak Bay)” and “The expenses are more accurately explained by staff recommended increases for operations and infrastructure”
There is no dispute that the District’s infrastructure is in very poor condition. “Alarm Bells” were sounded in the 2014 official Community Plan, the Opus Report, and in many District Reports in recent years. The Opus Asset Management Report dated July 2015 and held back and released in 2017 recommended: “Strong leadership……teamwork and establishing a cross-functional team that is effectively implementing asset management providing leadership and bridging across all departments in the District.” The Districts own Asset policy also recommends this - see Appendix #1.
Since 2015, not only has an intra-coordinated asset management team not been formed but the opposite approach to “asset management planning” has been taken. More and more administration staff have been hired for departments, to assist with accomplishing their own mandates. The result of this uncoordinated approach, along with delayed out of sequence priorities, has been disastrous.
Not only have departments been allowed to work at cross-purposes but, the new $1,000,000, administration staffing price tag, recommended by the District’s Chief Officer and approved by Council, has prevented more core staff to be hired to do the work. With the all-time high property tax increases maxed-out, there has been no budget funding to hire more core staff.
With interest rates at an all-time low, other communities have borrowed to cover their asset deficits. However, it may be for the best that Oak Bay has not incurred this debt: given many of Council’s expenditures this funding may well have been spent inappropriately.
With departments each going its own way, the harmful impacts on Oak Bay’s infrastructure and environment will continue (See Oak Bay Watch Perspective and Appendix #2).
Putting funds in “all the wrong” places has meant that the root cause of the infrastructure crises inadequate funding and core staff) has not been addressed. There is now a full complement of well-paid administrative staff and consultants to say what is to be done to improve the infrastructure, but there has been no increase in core staff to do it.
Residents have indicated they are more than willing to pay more taxes for infrastructure improvements but, had no say about the exceptional Administrative staff increases. It is obvious that $1,000,000 plus for new administrative staff salaries, benefits and consultant costs means that our annual property tax increase starting point is now 5.1%. The routine high tax increases, defined in a 2015 OBN resident letter as outrageous and enormous, can no longer be attributed solely to infrastructure costs or the pandemic.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective (What every resident should be aware of)
The 2015 Opus Asset Management Report was very clear. If the necessary “homework” had been done, the tax generated by all of the record high property tax increases since that time could have been spent to implement the Opus recommended, comprehensive, Infrastructure Improvement Plan. The Plan includes. “Recommendations to improve the elements of Information, Finances, People and Assets.”
Over the years, Residents and Oak Bay Watch have pointed out time and time again the harmful impacts of over-development. Some of these impacts include natural asset destruction, environmental damage and the significant addition of so much more pressure on the already “fragile” infrastructure.
Harmful development impacts are identified in the District’s Asset Management Policy and the Asset Management Strategy. It is obvious the leadership does not understand that these polices were made to be followed not as “decorations” or guidelines to be ignored. (See Appendix #1 - Recommended reading for more troubling Information and the website Link).
For some reason, all of this has escaped the attention of the District’s leadership. It is perfectly clear that the leadership is obviously not listening to residents, its asset management consultants or, for that matter not following its own Asset Strategies and Policies (see Appendix #1). Instead, more and more tax dollars and staff time are being used for densification practices and strategies not endorsed by most residents that have resulted and will continue to result in further natural asset and environmental damage.
It is not clear to us why the very important District’s Asset Management Policy and the Asset Management Strategy recommendations were not referenced in the recent Climate Change Task Force Report?
Residents were obviously not happy with Council and made major changes in the 2018 election. Residents have informed Council in many surveys and Council submissions that their most important priorities are: infrastructure improvement, preventing over-development of their single-family neighbourhoods, and controlling taxes and expenditures. What is it Council and the leadership do not understand? Is it possible that developers have more influence than residents?
---------------------------------
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Appendix #1
The Municipal website Asset Management Program identifies the District’s Asset management Policy and the Asset Management Strategies
https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/plans-and-reports/asset-management-program
Excerpts form District Asset management Policy :
“Who should read this?
“Asset management is an inherently multidisciplinary process designed for Municipal staff. This process content is relevant for all departments /disciplines involved in asset management.
Natural Assets support the delivery of core services, while doing so much more. Considering natural assets (trees vegetation soil etc.) within the asset management processes the District can decrease capitol operations, and maintenance costs, increase levels of service, enhance the ability to climate change, and reduce the community’s underfunded liabilities all while protecting or enhancing the multitude of other benefits that natural assets provide.”
Appendix #2
What is the reasoning behind destroying natural asses and the environment (trees, vegetation and soil etc.) Lot- By- Lot- By-lot?
With the advent of the “Communications Specialist”, the Oak Bay News February 4th, 2021 edition painted a glowing report about the District’s infrastructure expenditures. It explained how the exceptionally high annual property tax increases of the last two years were used to raise replacement costs by 23% for Oak Bay’s pipes, roads and buildings.
However, the floods of December 2020 and January 2021 revealed a very different picture. All of the flooding clearly demonstrated just how bad the infrastructure crisis is. At the February 18, 2021 Council Meeting, in response to Councillor questions and residents distressed about their properties’ severe flooding due to the District’s “inadequate pipe capacity”, the Director of Engineering stated:
“It really comes down to a level of service question. If Council and residents need to see more happening, or accelerated rehabilitation happening, then that implies not only an increase in funding but an increase in staff.”
There is no argument that past Councils have let the infrastructure deficit increase and underfunded improvement. In fact, three of the present Council members voted against a past Council’s majority approved resolution that did just that: the infrastructure was underfunded by transferring infrastructure reserve funding to hide spending on their own agenda items.
What is now apparent however is, that from 2015 to 2020 the District’s leadership added over $1,000,000 to the annual budget for new administration staff. If the cost of new support staff and consultant contracts are added, then the total amount exceeds an annual 5.1% annual property tax increase.
A current Council member had this to say about the May 1, 2015 Oak Bay News (OBN) headline and article announcing the first (5.1%) of a series of excessive property tax increases. “I agree the increases are exceptional high (adding, especially in Oak Bay)” and “The expenses are more accurately explained by staff recommended increases for operations and infrastructure”
There is no dispute that the District’s infrastructure is in very poor condition. “Alarm Bells” were sounded in the 2014 official Community Plan, the Opus Report, and in many District Reports in recent years. The Opus Asset Management Report dated July 2015 and held back and released in 2017 recommended: “Strong leadership……teamwork and establishing a cross-functional team that is effectively implementing asset management providing leadership and bridging across all departments in the District.” The Districts own Asset policy also recommends this - see Appendix #1.
Since 2015, not only has an intra-coordinated asset management team not been formed but the opposite approach to “asset management planning” has been taken. More and more administration staff have been hired for departments, to assist with accomplishing their own mandates. The result of this uncoordinated approach, along with delayed out of sequence priorities, has been disastrous.
Not only have departments been allowed to work at cross-purposes but, the new $1,000,000, administration staffing price tag, recommended by the District’s Chief Officer and approved by Council, has prevented more core staff to be hired to do the work. With the all-time high property tax increases maxed-out, there has been no budget funding to hire more core staff.
With interest rates at an all-time low, other communities have borrowed to cover their asset deficits. However, it may be for the best that Oak Bay has not incurred this debt: given many of Council’s expenditures this funding may well have been spent inappropriately.
With departments each going its own way, the harmful impacts on Oak Bay’s infrastructure and environment will continue (See Oak Bay Watch Perspective and Appendix #2).
Putting funds in “all the wrong” places has meant that the root cause of the infrastructure crises inadequate funding and core staff) has not been addressed. There is now a full complement of well-paid administrative staff and consultants to say what is to be done to improve the infrastructure, but there has been no increase in core staff to do it.
Residents have indicated they are more than willing to pay more taxes for infrastructure improvements but, had no say about the exceptional Administrative staff increases. It is obvious that $1,000,000 plus for new administrative staff salaries, benefits and consultant costs means that our annual property tax increase starting point is now 5.1%. The routine high tax increases, defined in a 2015 OBN resident letter as outrageous and enormous, can no longer be attributed solely to infrastructure costs or the pandemic.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective (What every resident should be aware of)
The 2015 Opus Asset Management Report was very clear. If the necessary “homework” had been done, the tax generated by all of the record high property tax increases since that time could have been spent to implement the Opus recommended, comprehensive, Infrastructure Improvement Plan. The Plan includes. “Recommendations to improve the elements of Information, Finances, People and Assets.”
Over the years, Residents and Oak Bay Watch have pointed out time and time again the harmful impacts of over-development. Some of these impacts include natural asset destruction, environmental damage and the significant addition of so much more pressure on the already “fragile” infrastructure.
Harmful development impacts are identified in the District’s Asset Management Policy and the Asset Management Strategy. It is obvious the leadership does not understand that these polices were made to be followed not as “decorations” or guidelines to be ignored. (See Appendix #1 - Recommended reading for more troubling Information and the website Link).
For some reason, all of this has escaped the attention of the District’s leadership. It is perfectly clear that the leadership is obviously not listening to residents, its asset management consultants or, for that matter not following its own Asset Strategies and Policies (see Appendix #1). Instead, more and more tax dollars and staff time are being used for densification practices and strategies not endorsed by most residents that have resulted and will continue to result in further natural asset and environmental damage.
It is not clear to us why the very important District’s Asset Management Policy and the Asset Management Strategy recommendations were not referenced in the recent Climate Change Task Force Report?
Residents were obviously not happy with Council and made major changes in the 2018 election. Residents have informed Council in many surveys and Council submissions that their most important priorities are: infrastructure improvement, preventing over-development of their single-family neighbourhoods, and controlling taxes and expenditures. What is it Council and the leadership do not understand? Is it possible that developers have more influence than residents?
---------------------------------
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Appendix #1
The Municipal website Asset Management Program identifies the District’s Asset management Policy and the Asset Management Strategies
https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/plans-and-reports/asset-management-program
Excerpts form District Asset management Policy :
“Who should read this?
“Asset management is an inherently multidisciplinary process designed for Municipal staff. This process content is relevant for all departments /disciplines involved in asset management.
Natural Assets support the delivery of core services, while doing so much more. Considering natural assets (trees vegetation soil etc.) within the asset management processes the District can decrease capitol operations, and maintenance costs, increase levels of service, enhance the ability to climate change, and reduce the community’s underfunded liabilities all while protecting or enhancing the multitude of other benefits that natural assets provide.”
Appendix #2
What is the reasoning behind destroying natural asses and the environment (trees, vegetation and soil etc.) Lot- By- Lot- By-lot?
