By Alison Taylor
Whistler and Squamish mayors are threatening to quash the regional district’s 2007 budget, highlighting the growing schism between municipalities and rural areas in the region.
Squamish Mayor Ian Sutherland told the regional board in no uncertain terms this week that he would not approve any upcoming budget, which gives the four rural area directors more than $168,000 to be spent in their communities at their discretion.
That money, which comes to the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District from a sizeable BC Hydro grant, traditionally has been used to fund community programs in the rural areas, rather than going into a general fund for the region as a whole.
“I will not vote for a budget that includes the Hydro grant with the way it is allocated now to the four area directors,” reiterated Sutherland after Monday’s heated SLRD meeting.
Whistler joined Squamish in opposition to the existing grant policy.
“What we’re saying is that the status quo needs to be changed,” explained Ken Melamed after the meeting. “There needs to be some clearer process around it and some more logical allocation of the funds.”
Together the two Squamish directors and the Whistler director can quash any financial plan for the region if it’s not to their liking; they fund the bulk of region’s budget and their voices on financial decisions carry more weight.
But area directors aren’t going to let the money go without a fight.
“These funds are a very important part of an electoral area,” said Mickey Macri, director of Area B, which covers the areas of Duffey Lake, Seton/Shalalth and Texas Creek.
It’s a financial tug of war that’s plagued the SLRD’s board table for years without resolution.
And while on the surface this issue is about the disbursement and allocation of the BC Hydro grant, at the heart of the matter is a growing sentiment among the municipalities, who fund the lion’s share of the regional district’s budget, that their concerns aren’t being heard at the board table.
“You don’t listen to the folks who give you the money in the first place,” said Sutherland, before leaving the meeting. (See related story.)
This year BC Hydro’s payment in lieu of taxes was more than $330,000.
Less than half of that money, roughly $163,000, went directly into the SLRD’s planning budget for the entire region, while the remainder was split equally among the four rural areas.
That left the four regional directors of Areas A, B, C, and D with $42,000 to be distributed in their community in whatever way they saw fit.
Russ Oakley is the director of Area A, which covers the Gold Bridge and Bralorne area, with a population of 223, according to the 2001 Canada Census. The BC Hydro funds have contributed to several worthwhile community initiatives in his area, such as the Gold Bridge Community Club and the Bralorne Church.
Oakley points to the 70 square kilometre reservoir BC Hydro has in the valley bottom of his area — prime hunting and fishing lands which have been permanently removed from Area A’s land base.
“(The money) is in recognition of the fact that the electoral areas are most impacted,” he said.
“There’s no generating facility, reservoir or dam in the RMOW (Resort Municipality of Whistler), nor will there ever be.
“To take this small, almost insignificant (amount) from the people who are most impacted to me is not fair.”
Because of its small population and based on the assessed values of its homes Area A contributed $5,000 to the SRLD from taxes in 2006.
Whistler, by comparison, contributed $618,000.
It’s this disparity that Whistler takes issue with at the regional district table.
“Whistler has been paying a disproportionate share,” said Melamed.
“(The area directors) use of the (grant money) is (money) that has to be raised on the back of our taxpayer to fund regional district business.”
And while all directors recognize that the money is going to good use in the rural areas, Squamish and Whistler argue that everyone can do good things with that money.
The two mayors, who make up the biggest financial players at the board table, also critiqued what they see is a flawed process.
The four area directors are able to disburse funds, totaling more than $168,000 this year, in any way they see fit without a public process.
“There’s not a mayor in this room that can spend $50 without a council resolution,” said Sutherland.
Disbursing the money at the discretion of those four directors rather than the board of directors as a whole is troubling, he said.
And while he doesn’t want to cast aspersions on his fellow board members, Melamed agreed that the policy is flawed.
“It’s just inappropriate for people to have so little oversight on expenditure of what are deemed to be public funds,” he said.
At Monday’s meeting the four rural area directors, with the support of Lillooet’s Mayor Christ’l Roshard, voted five to four to keep the grant policy in place.
The mayors of Whistler, Pemberton and Squamish, along with Squamish councillor Raj Kahlon, voted against the policy.
But the issue isn’t dead.
When it comes to financial decisions — as opposed to policy decisions — the votes are weighted differently at the board table.
Out of a total of 21 votes, Whistler counts for five and the two Squamish directors count for four each. Together they have 13 of 21 votes.
Area C director Susie Gimse alluded Monday to the fact that the writing is on the wall for rural areas.
“Whistler and Squamish will make the decision,” she said. “They have the numbers.”
Knowing that they can quash the budget if this policy is still in place, Sutherland left the meeting feeling frustrated and let down by the board.
“We’re going into a budget process doing a budget based on a formula that we know will not get the support when it comes to the weighted vote,” said Sutherland.
“So we’re going through almost a charade of a budget exercise.”
He plans to put forward a budget amendment at the next meeting to resolve the issue based on a weighted vote and allow staff to work on a budget that will get their support.
He said: “If they won’t deal with it one way, we’ll deal with it another way.”
