The Real Test of a Municipal Council Is What It Leaves Behind

Municipal elections have concluded, and across British Columbia, newly elected mayors and councillors are preparing to assume responsibility for the governance of their communities. Some have been returned to office; others will be serving for the first time. All face the same fundamental challenge: reconciling the aspirations of their residents with the financial realities of municipal government.

Election campaigns naturally focus on what communities need and what candidates promise to deliver. New recreation centres, aquatic facilities, arenas, parks and other public amenities frequently feature prominently in those discussions. These are legitimate aspirations. Growing communities need infrastructure, and residents reasonably expect their municipal governments to provide it.

But there is an important distinction between identifying a need and determining how, when and at what cost that need can responsibly be met. During its last term, the Township of Langley pursued an aggressive approach to addressing its infrastructure deficit, particularly in recreational facilities. That approach was not without internal opposition, and the divisions became evident last Saturday when the incumbent mayor and a majority of incumbent councillors were defeated at the polls.

The Difference Between Promising and Governing

During an election campaign, candidates are free to advocate for ambitious projects and new services. Once elected, however, they assume responsibility for the entire municipality, not simply the priorities that attracted the greatest attention during the campaign.

Police and fire protection, roads, water and sewer systems, drainage and numerous other essential services must be maintained. Existing infrastructure ages and eventually requires replacement. Population growth creates additional demands, while inflation increases the cost of services residents already receive. These responsibilities seldom attract the same public attention as a new recreation complex, but they are no less important.

A council's responsibility is not simply to determine what its community would like to have. It must also determine what the community can afford, what must take priority, and what financial obligations it is prepared to pass on to future generations.

Borrowing Is Not Free Money

Municipal borrowing is a legitimate and sometimes necessary means of financing major infrastructure. Long-lived assets can reasonably be financed over time, allowing future residents who benefit from those assets to share in their costs.

There is nothing inherently irresponsible about municipal debt. The question is how much a municipality can prudently borrow while preserving its ability to meet other obligations. Borrowing allows construction to proceed sooner, but it does not eliminate the cost. It spreads that cost over many years, with interest. Every dollar committed to debt servicing is a dollar unavailable for other municipal priorities.

Equally important, the cost of a new public facility does not end when construction is completed. Aquatic centres, arenas and recreation complexes require ongoing expenditures for staffing, utilities, maintenance and programming. These costs become permanent obligations within municipal operating budgets, often requiring continuing subsidies from property taxpayers.

Consequently, decisions to construct major facilities create financial commitments that may extend well beyond the terms of the councils that approve them.

The Value of Financial Flexibility

Municipalities differ considerably in their capacity to finance infrastructure. Some have opportunities to expand their industrial and commercial tax bases. Others face geographic, agricultural or environmental constraints that limit future development. Residential growth generates additional tax revenue, but it also creates demand for infrastructure and services. Growth does not automatically pay for itself.

One of the most valuable assets a municipality can possess is financial flexibility. Healthy reserves, manageable debt and prudent long-term planning allow councils to respond to emergencies, address unexpected infrastructure failures and take advantage of funding opportunities. A council that has already committed much of its future revenue to debt servicing has fewer options when unforeseen circumstances arise. Maintaining financial flexibility ensures that today's decisions do not unnecessarily restrict tomorrow's choices.

A Responsibility to Future Generations

Municipal councillors are elected for limited terms, but the consequences of their financial decisions can extend for decades. Residents deserve more than assurances that a project is needed or that financing can be arranged. They deserve to know what it will cost to build, what it will cost to operate, how it will be financed, and what other priorities may be affected.

Good governance requires vision and ambition. Communities cannot prosper if their elected representatives are unwilling to invest in their future. But good governance also requires restraint, sound judgment and the willingness to make difficult decisions.

As newly elected councils begin their work, perhaps the most important question they should ask is not simply, "What do we want to accomplish during our term?" It is also, "What financial condition will we leave our municipality in when our term is over?" The lasting legacy of a council should not be measured only by what it builds, but also by the financial health and opportunities it leaves for those who follow.