Council’s mini-revolt a promising sign

Watson’s foes didn’t win, but at least they showed some democratic spine

Eels would be envious of the slipperiness of Mayor Jim Watson.

It looked as if the mayor was in for a difficult session at the city budget discussion Wednesday.

Eight city councillors wanted to break Watson’s sacred promise of a two-per-cent tax limit by imposing a small levy to help fix up the city’s crumbling infrastructure.

The motion was never going to pass, but it was uncomfortable for Watson, who is never happy when others hold an idea that is different from his. Worse, the motion to spend more on infrastructure highlighted a problem that has been insufficiently addressed by years of Watson budgets. Then, a miracle. The city treasurer announced that assessment growth would be larger than anticipated. The change was the biggest part of turning an anticipated $5-million operating deficit into a $10-million surplus.

Watson rightly acceded to the demands of those who believe the city should do more to fix up what we own by proposing that the onetime windfall be applied to help repair our roads, buildings, sidewalks and so on.

Pity he couldn’t have done it with a modicum of grace.

Instead, Watson launched into an ill-considered attack on councillors who had the temerity to criticize his budget. What they were really doing was attacking the professional integrity of the staff that put the budget together, Watson said.

A stinging criticism, but miles off base. Councillors were proposing a different approach, not attacking staff. Besides, the big decisions on the budget are made in the mayor’s office, not by city staff.

Watson’s various proxies on council then moved into the hypocrisy phase of the discussion. After days of telling the public that an $8-million infrastructure levy was such a drop in the bucket that it was hardly worth spending, they treated the windfall of $10 million like manna from heaven. Some even went out of their way to thank the treasurer for finding it, as if she had performed some magic, not underestimated a number.

After criticizing the eight councillors who wanted infrastructure action for delivering their motion too late and failing to consult with other councillors, Watson’s council supporters eagerly lined up to support a motion that had just come forward with no notice to the public or to councillors who aren’t part of Watson’s gang.

Council was told that the mayor and select councillors already knew there was a surplus to spend. The mayor was told last Friday but he didn’t think it appropriate to share that information with either the public or the councillors who don’t suck up to him.

Councillors were assured repeatedly that the bonus $10 million would be spent exactly according to the city’s already approved list of priority projects and that staff would determine what could go ahead.

Odd then, that when Coun. Tobi Nussbaum tried to make this official with a motion to let staff decide where the money goes, Watson and his supporters voted it down.

Expect the mayor to have more than a small say in how the money is spent. It will be interesting to see if any of it goes to projects in the wards of the eight councillors who opposed him. All that said, the mini-revolt was still a step toward restoring functioning democracy at city hall after a seven-year hiatus.

It was refreshing to see councillors hold different points of view on an important topic and express those views in public. The fact that they got a result shows that things can be achieved when not everyone follows the Watson party line.

It’s going to take our city politicians a while to get the hang of politics again. Those who supported the infrastructure levy didn’t do a good job of building consensus for it and those who opposed it acted like an additional 0.5-per-cent tax increase was the end of the world.

Still, it’s a start.