Local

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

War of words erupts at city hall

Council OKs budget but colourful language flies

By: Bartley Kives

25/03/2009 1:00 AM | Comments: 2

A "pile of dung" replaced the usual mud-slinging at city hall on Tuesday, as council's finance chairman resorted to graphic means to combat criticism of Winnipeg's spending plan for 2009.

In a vote that broke down along unofficial party lines, city council approved this year's operating budget by a margin of 11-4. The $785.3 million blueprint maintains Winnipeg's 12-year-old property-tax freeze, includes an extra $1 million for aboriginal training and offers $2.5 million worth of tax credits to more than 3,800 of the city's smallest businesses.

But council's unofficial opposition opposed the spending plan because the city plans to make cuts to the public service if Manitoba does not grant Winnipeg $15.1 million in additional funding when the Doer government tables the provincial budget this afternoon.

"I believe this is a cheesy way of blaming the province for layoffs," charged St. Boniface Coun. Dan Vandal, who voted against the budget along with Fort Rouge Coun. Jenny Gerbasi, Daniel McIntyre Coun. Harvey Smith and Elmwood Coun. Lillian Thomas.

The city has asked the province for $3.6 million in additional ambulance funding and up to $11.5 million in a separate request for new funding.

Mayor Sam Katz hinted Tuesday the province intends to honour part of these requests and that the city will be able to find enough "efficiencies" in the public service -- political jargon for cuts -- to balance the budget.

"The bottom line is there is no hole, OK?" the mayor told reporters. "We will have enough efficiencies and enough revenues to fill the number we're talking about."

Swandel, who assumed the role of finance chairman in October, accused opposition councillors of fabricating a financial crisis to attack his first operating budget.

"There they go again. This is no more than a disingenuous campaign of misinformation that amounts to no more than a pile of dung," Swandel said.

When asked to clarify his comment, the St. Norbert councillor said he didn't want to say "a load of crap" on the floor of council. " 'Dung' was more appropriate for the chamber," he said.

Couns. Bill Clement (Charleswood) and Russ Wyatt (Transcona) also delivered shots of their own, claiming that the province does not provide Winnipeg with a stable source of growth revenue.

City council will return to the chamber this morning for a regular council meeting with a busy agenda. Gerbasi plans to issue a motion to shelve the planned debate over the Tuxedo Yards Redevelopment -- that is, the $400 million IKEA project -- until the city conducts a more detailed cost-benefit analysis of the effects of the 80-hectare big-box development on Winnipeg's transportation system.

Also up for debate are the latest version of the city's roadside memorials bylaw, increased dog-licence fees, cuts to the park police and a plan to change the name of Garbage Day to Recycling Day.

bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca

What they said

Quotes from Tuesday's operating-budget debate at city council:

"I believe this is a cheesy way of blaming the province for layoffs."

— St. Boniface Coun. Dan Vandal, referring to the city's intention to find more "efficiencies" in the public service if the Doer government does not offer the city more money in provincial budget

"There they go again. This is no more than a disingenuous campaign of misinformation that amounts to no more than a pile of dung."

— St. Norbert Coun. Justin Swandel on opposition councillors' objections to the city's budget

"When everybody gets pissed at you, that's a good sign."

— Mayor Sam Katz on enduring criticism from both the left and right

-- Bartley Kives

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition March 25, 2009 B1

Rate this
This article has not yet been rated.

We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

2 Comments

Posted by: S_McFee

March 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Oh look! Its the usual suspects moaning about city council. I didn't even need to read the article and I knew who was complaining. I wouldn't mind the opposition if they had some viable alternatives to provide. Anyone can whine 'thats a dumb solution', but you'll be better heard when you provide a new one.

Report abusive comment

Posted by: Lost Johnny

March 25, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Instead of punishing law-abiding dog owners by increasing the licensing tax for their animals, the city should look at increasing the fine for non-compliance of the bylaw and more rigorous enforcement. How tough would it be to have an enforcement officer at an off-leash park like the Hurst Way venue during peak times to check compliance?

Oh, but then we would be punishing 'offenders'. Can't have that now can we?