Aurorans pay a higher price for more services: Report

October 9, 2013 · 0 Comments

By Brock Weir

Aurora residents enjoy more public programs and services than neighbours, but also pay a higher price per person.

Those are among the key findings presented to Councillors last week as part of a service level review. The review, conceived during last year’s budget process to see just how much bang the average Aurora resident is getting for their buck, finds that when compared to similar municipalities – municipalities comparable based on population, demographics, the size of their annual operating budgets, and other factors – Aurora has a higher level of service when it comes to parks and recreation, as well as roads maintenance.

The study was carried out by MNP Consulting and presented by Ian Smith. In his presentation, he said focus groups including Council members, municipal directors and program managers, said while there is always room for efficiencies, the general public was “happy” overall with the services they receive for their tax dollar.

“We didn’t hear that Council was concerned with a lot of the services being provided, feeling the residents were generally satisfied with the services offered,” said Mr. Smith. “But there are certainly opportunities you identified that could do it efficiently and effectively.”
More “effective and efficient” service was a strategy highlighted by Councillors last week as a way to move forward, along with further public consultation to hear what the taxpayers think firsthand.

“I get questions on services,” said Mayor Geoffrey Dawe of feedback he has received from residents. “I have definitely had people say ‘reduce taxes’, but I have never had anybody say reduce services. I have never had anybody say, ‘pick up garbage every four weeks, not every two weeks.’ I have never had anybody say, ‘don’t plow the snow as often.’
“My gauge is people are not asking to reduce services.”

Mayor Dawe said he agreed with comments earlier in the evening made by Councillor John Gallo that it is important to engage the public on their views on these services. Councillor Gallo questioned how best to gauge what the public actually want when given a full inventory of the services Aurora provides.

“How are we sure the level of services we provide are satisfied?” asked Councillor Gallo. “I have been here for six years…but I don’t remember seeing the study done where we have [asked] the public, ‘are you satisfied with the level of service we’re providing?’ That is important and it is not referenced.”

Mr. Smith said no definitive study has been done to take the pulse of “community satisfaction”, and comments within the study were “taken as anecdotal.” Aurora CAO Neil Garbe added, however, that last year’s capital budget included funds for a similar survey, which was ultimately deferred until next year to have something ready for the incoming Council.

For Councillor John Abel, improving service levels is very important but at the end of the day “efficiency means let’s do it cheaper, and that is good business practice.”

“Council needs to look very carefully in its last year of budget in doing it efficiently and cheaper, which means it will be less to the taxpayer,” he said. “At the same time, we have to act responsibly and we have learnt that from the infrastructure level, to attract business and sustain our community, we have to invest in replacing our capital and that is a very important issue.”

Councillor Michael Thompson expressed a slightly different view.

“This is centred on efficiencies and effectiveness, but I was looking for a little bit more innovation. I know we do a good job in providing services, I know we can always be more efficient and effective, we can always look at cost savings, but is there a better way to deliver the services? Is there innovation?
“There is nothing [here] to hang your hat on and have that deep discussion.”

One Councillor who did not provide her comments to the consultant was Councillor Evelyn Buck. She said she did not look at service levels from an administrative perspective, rather from a political one.

“My preoccupation is how much it costs people and what level of service are you willing to provide, and how best can you provide it at the least possible cost?” she said. “When do you recognize the limits of what people can afford? Councillors said people are very happy and satisfied with the level of service they are getting. That is not my experience. The people I experience are outraged by the amount of money this Council is spending on the various levels of service.”

For Councillor Buck, one source of this “outrage” is the money given annually for the operation of the Aurora Cultural Centre without revenue coming back into Town coffers, compared to programs in the Parks and Recreation department which this study shows have a fairly healthy return on investment.

For Councillor Wendy Gaertner, going back to nature was something to keep in mind when looking at service levels. Road management, she added, was worth a closer look.

“Residents might be happy with the service levels we provide, but do they want to pay for those service levels?” she asked. “That, to me, is a very important question going forward.”