Submitted by Karen Cathcart
Since August 2016, the Town of Golden and the Columbia Shuswap Regional District has been meeting to discuss the many shared services and facilities that we enjoy in our community.
These conversations took place under a committee of council: the Partnered Services Review Select Committee.
The committee membership included the mayor, two councillors, the director, two Local Advisory Committee members, and the CAOs for the Town and the regional district.
The Capacity Building Needs Assessment Report for Area A completed two years ago identified shared services as one of the areas of priority.
The Town and Area A have funding partnerships for a variety of services and facilities in the community; the Town is the owner of other recreational and cultural facilities within the Town that are not subject to a funding partnership. These facilities are managed and maintained by the Town, however, the facilities are used by many individuals and groups in the neighbouring rural area.
The Town of Golden, like many local governments, is being forced to rethink the scale and organization of public services given the rising costs to deliver these services. The Town is facing tough choices as available revenues fall short of what is needed to provide the desired level of service to the community.
To this end, the Town and the CSRD have each proposed a new cost sharing arrangement for four facilities that would account for those services and facilities that are available and utilized by both Town and rural residents, yet paid for solely by Town of Golden taxpayers. Those four facilities are the Mount 7 Rec Plex, the Senior’s Centre, the Golden Municipal Pool, and the Civic Centre.
One of the biggest challenges in developing a fair and equitable funding partnership between the Town and rural Golden (Area A) is the reluctance of some residents that live outside the Town to pay a share of the costs of recreation and cultural services.
This is an important consideration because one needs to keep in mind that any funding partnership between the Town and Area A will need to be approved by the electors in Area A. In addition, some residents may be reluctant to pay anything for a service or program that they do not use or that they use infrequently.
In addition to this, there are other challenges such as:
- It is difficult to measure with any precision the exact benefit received by non-contributing participants;
- How to address the differences in urban and rural expectations and the difficulty of achieving a service level and cost of service that will satisfy all participants.
- How does the CSRD ensure an appropriate degree of influence and control over service levels or service quality when decisions are made exclusively at the municipal level?
- How does the CSRD ensure adequate control over rising facility costs?
The Town of Golden offered a proposal to the CSRD for consideration that called for Area A residents to cover 40 per cent of the net operating costs of the four facilities. The CSRD representatives on the committee for the following reasons deemed the Town’s proposal based on a 40 per cent apportionment unacceptable because:
1. The likelihood of obtaining elector assent if rural residents are expected to assume 40 per cent of operating costs would be more difficult to achieve;
2. An implied governance discount should be factored into the cost sharing formula to account for the fact that the CSRD would have no say on how the facilities would be managed or operated;
3. There is a limited ability for certain rural residents to attend activities at the facilities based on location, and distance to, the facilities.
The CSRD proposed to provide an annual payment to the Town totaling 20 per cent of the aggregate net operating costs for the four core facilities. The arrangement would not provide for a pro rata share of capital costs.
Based on the 2017 budget for the four core facilities, the 20 per cent cost-sharing proposal represents an annual contribution from Area A taxpayers of approximately $94,000. This figure is based on 20 per cent of the 2017 Town’s net operating costs of $468,000. This amount translates into a tax rate of 0.0927 per $1,000 of assessment or $9.27 per $100,000. In addition, the CSRD is proposing $31,500 in capital over the next 10 years to be funded through community works - not taxation.
At the May 23 special Council meeting, councillors were expected to vote to either accept or reject the cost proposal from the regional district. If council votes to accept the proposal, then it will go to a referendum vote to the Area A electorate at the municipal elections in October. If council votes not to accept the proposal, the proposal does not move forward.
Please connect with me, if you have any questions or would like to discuss this proposal further.
Karen Cathcart
Electoral Area A Director
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
250-344-8357
kcathcart@csrd.bc.ca