City pulls transit U-turn
Decision may cost city more than money after CAO voices displeasure
City council has voted to revert to the old transit system, and the cost may be the city’s chief administrator.
In a dramatic scene at Monday’s meeting, councillors voted 6-3 to suspend changes that came under fire when they were introduced two weeks ago.
That might not happen for several months however, as routes are changed and budgets are adjusted, said CAO Merete Heggelund.
During debate she stated that the about-face by council and talk of administrative failures amounted to a vote of confidence in her leadership.
“My position is at your disposal,” she told council during debate, then left afterwards without addressing reporters.
Monday marked the third straight meeting in which council asked staff to seek solutions to a growing host of public complaints with new routes. In September, all but two main lines were without evening or weekend service, making it difficult to get to many jobs, and a new transfer system added time to travel, passengers complained.
Passed during budget talks in 2016, the review was bolstered by a survey saying the public backed transit cuts. It aimed to save $650,000 per year to offset tax hikes needed to replace a steep drop in energy income over the long term.
However, a heavy volume of complaints about waits and accessibility has flooded into the city.
Public services committee chair Coun. Julie Friesen introduced the motion, arguing that changes were “well intended,” but she feared fixing a legion of complaints over weekend and evening service would be “Band-Aid after Band-Aid.”
“The spirit behind this (motion) is to find a better solution, but put it back in the meantime,” said Friesen. “It’s just not working.”
Most council members agreed they had heard complaints or seen problems first hand.
Coun. Jim Turner said the changes were advertised as a better system for less money.
“It’s none of those things,” he said, adding that workers and employers have been put out by changes. “I’m fiscally conservative, but this is one area that we can’t cut ... When we voted to close the Arena, there were other arenas. “I don’t think it can wait.” Voting against the change were Mayor Ted Clugston and Couns. Bill Cocks and Jamie McIntosh.
“Going back to the old system is taking eight steps backwards,” said McIntosh, noting staff were charged with altering the new system two weeks ago.
“I recognize that it’s not working well and that we won’t be saving the (original target of) $750,000 we all hoped,” said Cocks. “(Reverting) will cause cost and delays. It’s ill-advised.”
Coun. Celina Symmonds said she had ridden with some routes and felt a halt was needed.
“The right thing is not the easy thing,” she said, speaking in favour.
“It’s tough to say that we’re going back,” said Coun. Brian Varga, “but it’s an essential service.”
“It’s a Financially Fit lever that I’m not prepared to pull,” said Coun. Robert Dumanowski.
Mayor Clugston said during debate he favoured more time for staff to work on the new system.
Later he spoke on behalf of council saying he hoped changes would be positive, but stressed they will take time.
“We need a budget amendment, which takes time, hire drivers, we just changed the bus signs,” he said. “It has to be reversed and I’m not sure that three months is a realistic timetable.
The fiscal realities could mean an additional 1 to 1.5 per cent tax increase next year, considering savings were already assumed in the 2018 plans budgeted
“The point is that this council wanted to see it done now and not leave it until after the election. They tried to expedite it.”
Administration ‘not under the bus’
Friesen said during the meeting she felt administrators were “not being thrown under the bus” by the reversal of the system.
After, administrators had done what council asked and didn’t want to comment on Heggelund’s statements.
“I’m horrified to think of it,” said Friesen. “(Staff ) is so far down the road on this. I didn’t make this motion feeling very good about it.”
Clugston also said it may not amount to a resignation.
“I work closest with her and I imagine that we’ll be having a long talk very soon,” he said.
Pearson said he supported the change-back, but felt the intent was not to admonish administrators.
“She’s the most valuable administrator we have, and this is a very real — I’d call it a slap in the face,” he said.
“It’s almost untenable from the administration’s point of view. Making it happen in short order is almost impossible.” Cocks agreed. “It’s sincerely felt on her part that she’s done her best,” he said. “None of us here want to make this a reflection on administration. But I understand where she’s coming from.”