METRO BOARD BACKS DOWN
Retirement allowance axed
After steady public backlash, Metro Vancouver’s board of directors have admitted they made a mistake by giving themselves a retroactive retirement allowance and pay raise last month.
At a meeting on Friday, after debate that was tense and confrontational at times, board members corrected the mistake by unanimously defeating a motion that would have amended the regional district’s remuneration bylaw.
“On behalf of the Metro Vancouver board, we did err in our judgment when we brought forward the remuneration bylaw,” board chair Greg Moore said after the meeting. “We heard loud and clear that we missed the mark and today we took steps to address that.”
The bylaw changes included a retirement allowance that would have seen the board’s 40 directors receive a lump-sum payment when they ceased to be an elected official. The allowance was to be retroactive to Jan. 1, 2007, but only apply to current municipal politicians who have served on the board.
On average, directors would have received about $1,100 per year of service retroactively and about $1,500 per year going forward, with the board chair and vice chair receiving significantly more based on their earnings.
The move was expected to cost Metro $498,000 in retroactive retirement earnings, and $62,500 per year going forward.
There was also a 15-per-cent pay adjustment, effective Jan. 1, 2019, to offset federal tax changes that will eliminate the non-taxable status of a portion of elected official salaries.
The changes — the introduction of a retirement allowance in particular — resulted in a firestorm of criticism from the public, citizens’ groups and members of the board during the days and weeks that followed.
On Friday, board vice-chair Raymond Louie introduced a reconsideration motion, which opened the topic back up for debate.
“While I agree that that’s good, I think far preferable would have been to go to the public before we made a decision, but we didn’t afford the public that opportunity because of the way the decision was made, and that is much more concerning to me than any other piece of this debate,” said Vancouver Coun. Andrea Reimer, who was not present for the meeting last month.
“The public should have a right of access to every decision, and particularly one … that’s extremely difficult for elected officials to be making without that input.”
West Vancouver Mayor Michael Smith, who has been outspoken on the bylaw amendments, called the retirement allowance “ridiculous” and criticized both the way the motion was brought forward and the governance of Metro Vancouver in general.
“We have an obligation to respect every single dollar we collect in taxes,” he said. “This motion was completely the opposite direction.”
Although he called it a mistake, Moore said the amendments were introduced to address legitimate concerns about cuts to compensation as a result of tax changes and provisions for politicians whose tenure in public life is suddenly cut short without any kind of severance.
Moore said appropriate remuneration can also help attract the right people to run for public office, a thought echoed by a number of directors.
“There’s a lot of people in this regional district that would like to run for office, so they can be here at Metro,” said longtime Delta Mayor Lois Jackson. “It’s not cheap. You have to give up your job basically to work here.”
Reimer said the remuneration should not necessarily be attractive, but instead “fair and reasonable.” Burnaby Coun. Colleen Jordan stressed that being on the Metro board shouldn’t be looked at as a full-time job, but as part of being an elected official and remuneration should reflect that.
After the vote on the initial remuneration motion failed unanimously, killing the amendments, Moore introduced a new motion (which was passed) to direct staff to prepare terms of reference for the establishment of an independent third-party review panel — with representation from the public and private sector — and initiate a review of board remuneration, including benefits.
Terms of reference will be brought to the current board, but the panel will report back after the local government elections in October, likely in early 2019.
“I think it’s too bad. I think it’s really too bad that we couldn’t have adopted an appropriate remuneration bylaw before the election, but we failed in that so I think this is the best way forward based on that,” said Moore.
Canadian Taxpayers Federation B.C. director Kris Sims, who was at the meeting, called the reversal a win for taxpayers and ratepayers.
“We’re very pleased to see this choice. This is a very good decision, it’s the right decision,” she said. “To give credit where credit is due, they heard a lot of people speaking up and screaming and yelling, and they reversed their decision. So, we hope that thinking is carried forward when they get this thirdparty recommendation.”