Last year, taxpayers were hit with a 5.8% basic property tax increase plus utilities etc, council being already halfway through its first budget year, ergo the spending underway without a strategic plan. It did seem fair to give inexperienced new council members time to get informed and learn the ropes. Back then, I wrote to each councillor individually, laying out work in progress from the prior term, approved plans underway or waiting to start, outstanding policy work, some 12 major plans to set Maple Ridge up for a brighter future. Some notables, like our first-in-BC CSSI public safety program, Pitt Meadows transition to their own police department, civic social & recreation infrastructure, heavy emphasis on responsible land use particularly transit oriented development within our urban containment area. A big one being the Lougheed corridor plan which we had deferred at second reading as it was not going to deliver enough density, or the right kinds of mixed use, and the desire to not do industrial or row townhouses within this area. Â Further was our game-changer employment plan, two substantial areas that would see our city to a 10% tax base swing we so sorely need to relieve our residential taxpayers and provide jobs at home. My crew bit big as our city was and remains behind on so many things like infrastructure, public safety, homes that people can actually afford, jobs, a clean, tidy investment-ready city, particularly downtown, that would attract investment, shopping, jobs, mixed-use responsible development, etc. This is what the public told us they wanted, and the right thing to do was share all the plans and work underway accordingly.
All this work was projected at a billion-dollar spend in capital and operational costs over the next decade to meet a projected population forecast of 140K residents by 2040. With our small economy, we initiated other viable ways to pay for all our needs with the overarching goal to not further burden residential taxpayers. The needs are great, everyone in Ridge knows this all too well. Over the decades, our city has been trying to do this on a breadcrumb budget when a bakery was needed. Existing financial policies were and continue to hold us back, their review was also ordered by us, and yet still no change. The answer to dealing with our needs do not lie in the continued hammering of residents, particularly given during these very seriously challenging times for people. Our downtown continues to suffer from neglect on cleanliness and safety for all. A safe investment-ready city has been a top priority for well over a decade, also echoed by sitting council members, and yet still no review of the first in BC tiered public safety model. Not one meeting in a year and a half to discuss this major undertaking that sought to take a much different approach to public safety. The lack of support for the incredibly effective CSO program, whose set service levels have been grossly short for a year and a half now from the 16/7 coverage, and the neglect is starkly evident. Saying public safety is a priority is easy; delivering, and your obligation to review and support as appropriate, requires action. Saying you have dispatched to a single incident of people smoking fentanyl in Tim Hortons is a cop-out. Where is the review? Why hasn’t this been discussed in public? The police chief’s words near on begged you for a plan in 2024 budget discussions. You owe the public this work, as well as full public disclosure on Pitt Meadows’ choice to establish their own more community oriented model of policing. What will the Ridge model and service levels look like given the vastly different approach we took? Full disclosure and public engagement are required. Taxpayers have the right to know who is paying for what, and what will be provided.
In listening to all the budget meetings, ingesting the reports that fall short on much needed detail, there are unasked and unanswered questions. Some notables, given the desperate need for more housing, questions arise from the decision to add four more planners to the department of 25 handling some 140 applications, 110 pre-applications, and 140 reports to council last year, outsourcing work to paid consultants, yet the development approval process remains unimproved which simply drives up the cost of homes. The question for you is what will four more planners do? The lack of twenty first century technology must be the greatest efficiency and performance tool the city needs and yet the hybrid patchwork remains the standard. We operate in an online digital age and yet water meters still are not on line, no live data on all business lines are absent, the city continues to operate with archaic inefficient systems.
At the fire department, $2.7M is requested for 2024 in a four-year plan to add another assistant chief, 1 captain, 20 lieutenants, 24 firefighters, two fire prevention officers, that will add more than $10 million in annual operational costs. That aside from the desire to replace firehall 3 on 203rd to another close by location. These requests are for a lot more than the approved Fire Department master plan calls for, which may well be supportable, but no supporting data on things like response times was provided during budget talks to support these costly decisions. Why are we adding what is termed as a two-person EV medic unit? This looks to be replacing the red dodge pickup with black canopy that has existed for several years doing drug overdose calls. If MR Fire is now formalizing a drug overdose response service, and given that 50% of fire department call volumes are medical predominantly illicit drug overdose, can local taxpayers expect that the province pays accordingly given the woefully inadequate and under supported provincial ambulance service, or should local taxpayers just accept another download onto property taxes?
Since my first communication to new council, and given the lack of response and progress the public can see on key items the public has called for, and given council are now 1.5 years into their term, I feel obligated to raise several concerns in public. The highly successful CSO service is not delivering the set 16/7 coverage since late 2022, why not restore the coverage and improve this proven service that effectively deals with street disorder, those without a home, those struggling with addiction, so police can concentrate on serious crime. The data, if and when you look at it, proves out the programs value both in social and economic benefits.
Back in the 2023 budget two police officers were funded to address Pitt Meadows’ decision to establish their own detachment, which I questioned directly to council. Maple Ridge supported the Pitt Meadows decision to separate and build their own tailored model, fair enough given the differences in our communities, however we made it clear that Maple Ridge taxpayers should remain whole from a PM decision. My council authorized an independent analysis to be conducted to determine our position given PM had done theirs three years ago. That analysis would inform the MR position in order to fully understand the hybrid structure when the decision was made, fairly determine each side, review our model and set service levels along with a plan to implement and fund the Maple Ridge public safety model including the MR police. This work is seriously overdue given Pitt Meadows is separating next year. The 2024 budget includes funding for 12 more officers fresh from training depot, billed to Maple Ridge ratepayers. This transition sees 23 experienced officers, including seven corporals leaving Ridge. Absent is the disposition of 11 integrated positions and 3 provincial officers? Â Why are we losing so many experienced officers and having to train new ones? Ridge is paying in a lot more than just tax dollars, experience has a lot of value alone. This unnecessarily appears weighted in Pitt Meadows’ favour, is potentially divisive and is very concerning for Maple Ridge taxpayers, given council has not discussed this in public or shown any details to show otherwise. One would think when establishing one’s own police department, there would be public discussions, including public engagement on such a serious matter as how best to meet the needs of Maple Ridge public safety. It is hard to not conclude that public safety really is not a priority for council, and Pitt Meadows looks to be the main beneficiary of a decision that should not burden Ridge taxpayers.
With today’s reality for most people, the high cost of living, housing, etc., one might think some effort would be made to keep tax rates as low as possible, particularly given you were briefed on some significant costly decisions, yet have not done the necessary work needed to mitigate some of them. Or should the public just expect the blasé passing along of these expensive yet potentially avoidable costs on an ongoing basis that are certain to provide no present or future relief to taxpayers.
