Restraint Is Not The MOJO

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "It's Not The Deal":
Communities evolve, governments don't
Is it really overly difficult to understand that town revenues generate just so many dollars, and we have to live within those amounts?
Capital assets deteriorate over time and provisions must be made for repair or replacement. 
Staff need to be directed by Council vision, if there is such a thing, and held accountable for all expenditure.
*************
It sounds authoritative.  In terms of budget , it's dead wrong. There are no recognized limits to government spending in Aurora. 
According to a published statement, we take money out of your pockets, with something called "cash to capital." and place it in reserve accounts. In following  years , we spend it . With a straight face , it's possible to do so "on the basis of need" and not be influenced by questions of "funding issues"
"Funding issues" presumably being affordability. 
"Need" being doling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to volunteer groups to spend with no accountability whatsoever.  
There's a reserve fund named "Council's Discretionary Fund".
For  definition  read slush fund 
Last  I heard it  mentioned ,  $1.3 million were tucked away.
Didn't even know about it.  
If a private business fails to keep costs  in check, it is  no longer competitive.Clients are lost.Business fails and  bankruptcy follows. 
Public business has a monopoly. If the elected body is not vigilant, there are no checks . No conscience at work. No limits to how high taxes can be  increased to pay for whatever  wins friends and influences enemies. or for no good purpose whatsoever.
One of a number of items discussed on  Monday's budget session was $100,000 for the Arboretum.
An  annual payment  has been made since  2007 .Last year the request was for   "only" $50,000.
This year, the  request  is apparently "only"  $60,000. 
The  new figure was not proffered  until the item was  raised for discussion. 
I  moved the item  be deleted from the capital budget.
 I pointed out when it was first allocated, we had just sold  hydro, interest on the capital was  available and the project seemed  worthwhile. 
Things have changed. The economy took a downturn. Interest on  reserve funds  is minimal . The funds are now coming from taxes  
We have the emerald ash borer and destruction of hundreds of trees in the urban forest to contend  with and Council has made a decision to "wean"ourselves from  $600,000 a year contributed to general revenues from hydro reserve fund interest. 
The fund is actually losing value as a result.  
Councillor Gaertner argued the Arboretum is a small group, mostly elderly and  hundreds of volunteer hours  are contributed. The Councillor  invited  Leisure Services Director to outline his vision 
He cheerfully complied 
Several other Councillors agreed  to the value of  volunteerism.
The motion to delete failed. I'm not sure if it even received a seconder.
The facts are not exactly as stated. 
The Arboretum  group does not do the heavy lifting indicated  by Councillor Gaertner. The parks department does.
First year , a contract was let  for weeding flower beds. 
Second year,they bought a building to store garden tools.. It cost close to $50,000. 
Third  year somebody backed a tractor  into the door jam  of the building.
Nobody acknowledged responsibility. 
The next year  construction rubble was removed from around the AFLC and replaced   with  garden soil  and  massive stone blocks  The project  cost around $87,000.
Last year the request was for "only"  $50,000 . It was used  in a contract to  plant the beds created the year before at the bottom of a slope.
Not hugely visible.
I moved the motion originally in 2007 to provide the funds.A million dollars over a ten year period seemed enough to make an impact. We were flush with nine hundred thousand dollars a year   from interest on the Hydro Reserve.It seemed like a good use.  
Half a million  has been spent already. I took a drive around the Arboretum on Tuesday to see the progress. 
It's like a drop  in the bucket.
If  the parks department had that  money, there would be  accountability. . Priorities would be established.
This way no-one is accountable to  taxpayers 
The Arboretum  are a well-meaning  handful of volunteers.  
I understand  the  Newsletter does not attribute funding  to the town. It's probably an oversight but it contributes nothing to public awareness of  where the  funds came from. 
Councillor Gaertner argues  we should not cut  the flow of funds. because it  would discourage volunteerism.The sentiment was echoed around the table.
It's but  a sample of the vision and stewardship your elected body  contributes to the budget process
There are others. 
If Council s willing to hand out hundreds of thousands of dollars to non-accountable groups to spend willy-nilly, why should we expect the administration who are accountable to the same Council, to exercise restraint.
The word is not in their lexicon.