By Gagandeep Ghuman
Published: March 1, 2014
It can take as many as 10 days, sometimes two weeks, to receive the phone call bookworms eagerly wait for: Your inter-library loan book has arrived.
Now, council has approved a budget cut that will further delay that phone call.
The service reduction will save $3500, but will result in more delays for inter-library loan books.
The inter-library loan book is a popular service: In 2013, library ordered 1480 books for its patrons, and 1715 books in 2012.
Inter-library loan, however, isn’t the only service reduction at the library.
Council also voted to reduce children and adult programs at the library. [manual_related_posts]
A summer reading program for children will be reduced, although there are few details available on the nature of that reduction. The program encourages reading by helping children keep track of what they are reading through the summer.
It’s still not clear which adult program will be reduced. Along with the library cuts, council also voted for less maintenance for sidewalks and community parks.
Councilors started the budget exercise with a noble, if an impractical goal: Let’s see what a zero per cent tax increase would look like, they told staff. 
Management, on the other hand, recommended a budget that would see a 7.7 per cent tax increase.
Council and management seem to have met in the middle at 5.34 per cent tax increase for this year.
But where they have found common ground, residents will have to accept service cuts.
Squamish public library has already reduced the library service on Sundays during the summer months of June to August.
The animal shelter and pound office will see a reduction in office hours, a saving of $18,583.
Fewer local government ads in the Squamish Chief will save the tax payers $4,000.
There will be reduced maintenance on select community parks, saving the tax payers $12,285.
There will also be reduction in sidewalk repairs and bike lane maintenance, a combined saving of $24,575.
Volunteer practices and training will also be reduced, saving the tax payers $7,500.
In total, contractions worth $721, 195 are being proposed as of now, but these could change as the budget is finalised.
But if there are contractions, there are also some service level increases and special project to benefit the community.
With a funding of $20,000, Squamish council plans to upgrade the arts council building and do some exterior repairs.
Squamish Adventure Centre gets an exterior wood staining and floor repairs with $31,000.
Squamish council also plans to spend $70,000 on downtown revitalization.
A full list of service reductions, increases and special projects can be found here.
Steve Drinkwater says
Dear Editor,
I find your lead-in statement that council “(has) an aim to keep taxes low…” so far off the mark to be comical, if it weren’t for the outrageous nature of this news. Raising taxes by more than 15% over a two-year period, when the inflation rate over the same period was a little over 2%, is not the work of a council trying to minimize the burden placed on Squamish taxpayers. It is the work of a free-spending council.
Given that this is an election year, it could prove to be a career-ending move for those council members who vote for any tax hike this year.
Richard Tripp says
Steve, I would suggest that 15% over a couple years is actually pretty good, albeit unpleasant.
Prior to the last election every single council member knew Squamish was in trouble financially and although it was kept quiet by most at the time it was expected to take at least 5 straight years of double digit increases, just to maintain the town as it was. Add to that the necessary need to replace and upgrade infrastructure and attempt to satisfy growing demands for improved ammenities and service levels and one soon sees what a conundrum those handling the budget process are in.
It’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Squamish has a large demographic of families with very young children. Without a serious increase in revenues to meet the challenges faced by Squamish I imagine there will also be a notable downward pressure on population as these families leave for competing communities better able to provide services, amenities, jobs and opportunities as their children come of age. Squamish already struggles to compete with communities near and far when it comes to attracting residents, new business and outside investment. This trend of rising taxes, in all it forms, reduced services and compromised infrastructure will only increase the difficulties faced in those challenges.
All other considerations of LNG proposal aside, this is where the “Peanuts” tax revenues referenced by Tracey Saxby seem to add up to something the town could put to good use.
GAS, risks and all, will deliver jobs and business opportunities. Eric Anderson’s and others have great ideas on how to create openings for other traditional and emerging industries.
Every one of these proposals is full of flaws and risks. Every one of them had and will heat up squeaky wheels beating drums and telling tales of how the sky will fall. Every one of them will be a piece of the puzzle Auli Parvianien recently referenced.
Embrace them. Let them succeed, let them fail, let them evolve and let them collectively become the new economy that supports the new Squamish, ’cause this one is not sustainable!
Micky says
The Squamish Public Library has very limited resource. There are hardly any books there, inter library loan was kind of filling this vacuum, and that is now being cut too!
What a shame!
Donny says
Talking of Tax money-Can anyone tell me :-
1. What was the cost of construction of the electric vehicle charging station outside City Hall ?
2. Has anyone used it yet ?
Susan Chapelle says
Donny,
The electric charging station was built on a grant by BC Hydro, no cost to the tax payer. It is a pilot project to allow electric vehicles to travel from Vancouver to Whistler with a place to charge, and possibly stop downtown Squamish on the “green highway” initiative. Vancouver has installed 60, and has won a green award from FCM for the efforts. Many business have also installed charging stations. It is for possible future use when we can move to more electric vehicles. Might as well install it on a grant.
For anyone wanting to contribute to finding more tax cuts, please show up at council, send us a letter and be specific. The full budget document is available online. Taxes were historically low, your previous councils spent the reserves completely so it will take a bit of effort to build the reserves. Diking and flood management is an enormous expense. Years of going to 0% in an election year has killed the savings, maintenance of necessary infrastructure. Feedback is useful if it has items listed, like where you would like to see further service reductions. The public meeting is coming up and al the budget info can be found at Squamish.ca/budget. We now have 0% on the industry line, and small business is picking up much of that slack. Feedback from all sectors would be great. Here is some information on the green highway initiative.
http://www.pacificcoastcollaborative.org/priorities/transportation/Pages/GreenHighways.aspx
Steve Drinkwater says
Don’t kid yourself, Ms. Chapelle. We’re paying for those (unused) electric charging stations through higher BC Hydro rates. It’s still a tax, just called something different, and levied by a different level of goverment.
And on that topic, that charging station has taken at least one parking spot away from in front of the Municipal Hall. How may carbon-spewing vehicles now have to drive a block away to park? Add it all up and I’d guess there’s more carbon going into the atmosphere now than before. This move was just for optics, I’m afraid.
Jessica Reid says
It’s a real shame to loose inter-library loans. As a book club member, myself and other gruop members use that service a lot. Does it need to cost $31,000 to shine up the Adventure Centre? Sigh.
Brad Hodge says
We need to make some hard decisions and get a little tough. If it were me, there would be a lot of unpleasantness going on. First the white elephants like SAC go overboard. Then I start looking for ways to reduce staff costs (fewer staff, a toigher line with CUPE, etc). Then I go after a few sacred cows with user fees and/or cutbacks (soccer fields, etc.). Maybe I even rethink our expensive and underused transit system. Then I start looking for efficiencies in each department. How do we plan smarter for road upgrades? How do we keep admin costs down at the landfill? Then I go after our consultant habit. Next I cut Council pay and expenses (no more junkets), because I’d rather the library keep the interlibrary loans or the pound stay open longer. I’d stop discouraging businesses that we need to set up shop here with bans and diatribes against big business. I’d actually try to cut business taxes so I’m sending the right message and make more money on a bigger base. There’s a lot, actually. Internal audits would tell the tale. I studied 10 different communities our size. They’ve done combinations and or all of the above. It can be done.
Jaspera says
SPCA does an amazing job to look after a variety of animals, to find vet help for them to repair injuries or ill health, to provide shelter after being dumped by uncaring humans, to feed them, and find volunteers to care for them. Staff is extremely small, and very frugal – unlike our City Hall. Many animals need spaying and neutering so that mistakes of the past are not repeated in the future, at considerable cost to the SPCA and to the community, and ultimately the animals. But Council in its wisdom has decided to chop the meagre $4000 designated for vital spaying and neutering. In the meantime, on the other side of the compound, council has continued its vendetta against animals, by deciding to chop $16,000 off the Animal Control/Pound budget. Again this is and has been a shoe-string operation for years, with wretched accommodation for both staff and animals (primarily abandoned, and often abused dogs). The facility is run by very few staff, on a very limited budget, and relies upon donations or contributions from the public, as well as volunteer assistance, such as dog-walking. The equipment is out-dated and limited. The Council boasts about collecting more fees, including licenses and fines – but only a portion of that is allocated to the Pound/Shelter. No Animal Control officers work on weekends so if a dog is lost and needs rounding up that has to wait until the following Monday. Or volunteers do their best to help out. Instead of allocating the above $20,000 to the Arts Council building or $31,000 (yet more) to the Adventure Centre, why not provide that to the Dog Shelter/Pound and the SPCA who are doing such an admirable job with, few staff, limited, outdated equipment and facilities? Perhaps the Arts Council could galvanize its members and creatively turn the SAC building into an artistic delight (which it is not) by obtaining free paint and services from around Squamish. Ditto the Adventure Centre which has been a “cash-cow” from the beginning. Somehow I doubt that this Council which has shown itself to be unwilling to support adequately animal welfare or the environment will be amenable to these suggestions. I echo the commenter earlier who said that it is outrageous that this Council is raising taxes by 15% over 2 years when the inflation rate was barely 2%. And the other commenter who sighed about the demise of the Inter-Library Loan. – agreed! Nothing like undermining community literacy. Meanwhile what about cutting back on the numbers of staff, consultants, branders, and other hangers-on at Muni Hall? If other communities, including Whistler, can do it, why not Squamish? But I note that Council is very careful to avoid a discussion of those cut-backs though suggested many times by the public. A small cutback there would more than cover the $4000 needed by the SPCA and the $16,000 for the .Dog Shelter. And that would be money well spent!
larry mclennan says
Bradley- run for council , I like your attitude. But to give current council some credit, after spending tens of thousands on “rebranding Squamish” we finally have something to define the town- ” Welcome to Squamish- no shirt, no shoes and most of all NO SERVICE”.
larry mclennan says
Jaspera as a life long animal lover I share your compassion for the critters we co-habit this earthly sphere with but, if I may, I wish to correct one term you used in describing the Adventure Centre as a “cash cow”. A ” cash cow” is a term often used to describe an entity which contibutes positively (gives nutritional milk (positive cash flow) to an enterprise). In the case of the SAC , if you wish to maintain a bovine analogy, I would use the male gender and describe the bodily effusement as eminating from a different body cavity.
Gord says
Everyone wants to bitch about the tax increase and they all want us to remain a sleepy little town. You have someone that wants to spend 600+ million on a mountain just outside of town, another company wants to upgrade a existing area into a lng plant but NO we complain about that. We can’t have our cake and eat it. Wait 10 more years when our sewer and water pipes start crumbling cause of cut backs.
larry mclennan says
But Gordie- think of all the benefits from the branding. That’s going to be a real driver of the economy- . All the cracks in the roads will be fixed- the sewer/water pipes will be first class. The recreational facilities -top notch- all we have to do is ignore responsible fiscal management- ban businesses and brand, brand brand. It makes council appear to be actually doing something -and isn’t that what we all want?
Douglas R. Day says
The “Elephant in the Room” regards budget cuts in Squamish, is and has been for the past 10 years, pissing away a $Million Dollars a year in Consultant Fees and interest expenses on the now infamous SODC Fiasco.
That would pay for a lot of Library Books!
Successive Councils including the current one, have seemingly turned their brains off when it comes to this scandalous waste of our tax dollars.
It the USA they had a Revolution over a Tea Tax.
Maybe time for a Revolution here!
Douglas R. Day