A huge budget surplus as well as a new format for budgeting filled up much of the discussion at Athabasca town council’s meeting last Tuesday night.
Last year, the town accumulated an $880,000 surplus, something that caused much concern among some on council.
“I found the fact that we were withdrawing on reserves extremely troubling. And to have a surplus and still do that, is warrant for more investigation,” said councillor Tanu Tsyzka-Evans.
Mayor Roger Morrill agreed with Tsyzka-Evans, adding, “This is not a small number, just under a million dollars. I just think we need to take a closer look at it, that’s all.”
Although at first glance it appears the large surplus means there was more revenue then expenses, chief administrative officer (CAO) Josh Pyrcz explained this wasn’t the case, as there was money that wasn’t spent last year.
Meanwhile, councillor Nichole Adams just wanted council to move forward.
“Our town went through a period of transition. We had a couple months where we didn’t even have a CAO,” she said.
“The budget last year is done, the tax rate last year is done. At some point, we can’t just dwell on the past, we have to focus on the future. We need to take the surplus (and) we need to decide where we’re spending our money this year, not talk about what happened last year.”
And part of moving forward is dealing with a change in format for the 2015 budget, brought in by the new CAO, that hasn’t gone over well with some on council.
“I spent some time on this budget and I’m used to looking at budgets, and I’m having a hard time making heads or tails (of it), partly because I’ve got nothing to compare it to,” said councillor Timothy Verhaeghe.
“That’s not meant to be a criticism, it’s just not conducive to my way of thinking.”
Morrill agreed, stating that the way he looks at the budget, there will need to be a substantial tax increase to balance it.
The new format was welcomed by a pair of councilors, both of whom are serving their first term on council.
“I believe in doing things a little bit differently and I believe in evolving. Governments that do things the same don’t normally end up as productive as those that change,” said Tsyzka-Evans.
Adams added, “We’re undergoing a process of change and this new budget format is one of the indicators that we have gone through a process of change over the last year. Trying to keep things the same doesn’t mean we’re moving forward, doesn’t mean we did a bad job in the past, but things do progress.”
The issue for Morrill and Verhaeghe is the difficulty in comparing the new format to the last budget. One example is several small accounts rolled into larger “parent” accounts, something Adams feels is better for council.
“I don’t see that it is useful for this council to nitpick over $3,000 in postage and things like that,” she said, “so I’m glad we’re removing these budget lines and that we’re consolidating it. … It doesn’t mean that we’re neglecting details, but rather that we’re not wasting our time $150 here, $300 there.”
A motion by Verhaeghe to return to the original budget format – a process that would take a month – was defeated.
He then made another motion to bring the budget to the town’s auditors for a second opinion and have a session to try to understand the new format, which was also defeated.
Pyrcz stated even if the old format was adopted, the information would be the same.
The discussion concluded when a motion from Tsyzka-Evans to hold a special budget meeting passed.
