LARRY'S CORNER- Hamilton's Former Mayor Speaks

The Amalgamation Demon Raises Its Uncomfortable Head

By Larry Di Ianni
(posted February 1, 2008)  

Lloyd Ferguson is turning out to be one of Council’s bright stars. Having taken over from his talented brother Murray, felled by a stroke during my term as Mayor, Lloyd is using his business skills and common sense to advocate for fiscal prudence and responsible decision-making at City Hall. We all should welcome his interventions. Even though he represents Ancaster on Council, he really speaks for a broader community right across the city.

But, and there is a but in this, the latest request by the Councillor to examine staffing levels in the city and benchmark the numbers in terms of costs has a responsible side, and a potentially reckless side to the information if it is interpreted in the wrong way.

Andrew Dreschel took the words right from my mouth in the latest Spec column by bemoaning the Councillor’s insistence on pegging the information to the pre and post-amalgamation periods. As Dreschel points out; and as senior staff maintains, the staffing numbers have precious little to do with amalgamation and a whole bunch to do with Council’s decisions to increase service levels.

I know that Councillor Ferguson did not want to wake the amalgamation giant with his analysis. His intentions are honourable and positive. However, by insisting that the analysis be done in the way it has been, leads to the erroneous conclusion that amalgamation is at fault for the rising staffing levels. It is not. In fact, a goodly percentage of the 800 plus new staff number is directly attributable to the downloading that the Harris government did at the same time as amalgamation. The rest of the increase is related to Council’s desire to right size the delivery of service after the Transition Board and former city Manager Doug Lychak decimated important service levels in significant ways.

Let’s look at a couple of specifics: Social Housing, for example, had been a provincial program prior to 2000. When it became a city responsibility, the entire provincial staff that ran the program migrated to the city, along with the expenses and assets of the program. Similarly when the land ambulance program that was provincially run was downloaded, the Council of the day decided for good reasons to take that program in-house rather than privatizing it, which was an option, if I recall. That program has been enhanced a number of times and this year is scheduled to receive a major increase in staffing of close to 60 additional positions, according to the news reports. This will have a multi million dollar increase to the budget. Is it worth it? Council says yes, and safety advocates would agree. Is it amalgamation’s fault? Definitely not! There are other examples in Animal Control and Water and Wastewater management where Council took independent decisions to take programs in-house thereby adding to the staffing complement of the city. In the case of Water and Wastewater management, we are being better served and more economically served because of the decisions taken. In the case of Animal control, it is definitely more expensive now than before and I don’t have the facts to judge whether the program is better now than it was. Council should review this. In all cases, though, you would be hard pressed to blame amalgamation for the increases in staffing levels.

According to a staff memo to Council, it is pointed out that of the 831 additional FTE (full time staff) since amalgamation, fully 209 positions were mandated by the province; another 169 were increases from downloaded programs and services brought in house and 453 resulted from enhanced service levels, solely decided by Council’s analysis of what needed to be done to ‘serve’ the city. As well, 275 of the 831 additional staff had no levy impact because they are 100% funded by the province, funded through capital programs or funded by the revenues these positions generate for the city. ‘No levy impact’ essentially means that the funds to pay for these positions do not come from the property taxes we pay each year.

Another point to make, and Councillor Ferguson has made this point publicly, is that the second part of his requested report has our city operations compared, in terms of costs, with those of many municipalities around us. In almost every case we compare favourably. The exceptions are Waste Management and Social Services. This is extremely good news because it means that Hamilton is actually running its programs more cost-effectively than the comparator municipalities. Staff is doing an excellent job of being efficient. It would be as silly to credit amalgamation for this as it is to blame it for the staffing levels. All of this is driven by good management, community need and Council decision-making.

The unfortunate part about having tied this needed report to amalgamation is that it will revive those anti-Hamilton feelings in those perpetually deluded and occasionally obnoxious secessionists in Flamborough, (Glanbrook has a few as well) who mask their stated need for independence with an unhealthy hatred for the city of Hamilton and the issues of its citizenry, I’m afraid. I always found Stoney Creek, Dundas and Ancaster to have a much more balanced view on the subject even when bemoaning, as all of us in the suburbs did, the forced process Harris used to unify this city. This anti city ‘spin’ will not help us build a stronger better community. I hope Councillors will stay away from this rhetoric; and I hope that those wailing separatists from Freedom Trains or Free Flamborough outposts will get the ignoring they deserve.

BACK TO LARRY'S CORNER

HOME