WHEREAS the Community Charter and the Local Government Act now require a local government to seek the assent of its electors through a vote or the alternative approval process where liabilities incurred under agreement or long-term debt exceeds five years since the Community Charter was enacted; AND WHEREAS the protection of the lives and properties of the citizens of a local government and the fire service agreement areas are of paramount importance to those given the responsibility for fire protection: THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Charter be amended to permit the purchase of replacement emergency fire fighting equipment that is mandated under the United Laboratories of Canada and the National Fire Protection Standards without the process of seeking the assent of the voters either through a vote or the alternative approval process.
MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY SERVICES Under the Municipal Liabilities Regulation BC Reg 2542004, local governments are exempt from elector approval requirements for liabilities over five years in order to comply with an order of a drinking water officer that expressly requires the municipality to install treatment works and only if the proposed liability is approved by the inspector of municipalities. This is directly related to the health of local residents and is only used in very limited circumstances. At this time, we are unaware of any similar orders that may be issued with respect to fire fighting equipment. As such, the rights of the electors to have a say in the liabilities of the local government and how their tax dollars are spent should be protected. MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Community Charter Charter was enacted to provide broad general powers to local governments, in conjunction with greater autonomy, accountability and transparency. Municipal councils have the responsibility of establishing five-year financial plans which detail the revenues and costs associated with operating the various services provided to taxpayers. Councils can make provisions to establish reserves towards equipment replacement and upgrades, funded from tax dollars. While this does not involve elector assent, it provides taxpayers with opportunities to provide input at the annual presentation of the proposed financial plan each year and to receive information regarding Councils objectives and performance measures for these services including the need for replacement reserves for emergency fire fighting equipment. Finding the balance required to effectively manage a communitys ongoing operations and assets and liabilities in the longer term is challenging. This is one reason why there are provisions to exempt the need for elector approval in some very limited circumstances; and, why the legislation requires this approval in most other scenarios. Councils may use revenue anticipation borrowing to meet current lawful expenditures, under the provisions of section 177 of the Charter, without elector approval, when operating funds are not immediately available. When a liability is incurred for less than five years and without debenture borrowing, elector assent is not required, as provided for in section 175 of the Charter. There are provision to enter into short-term capital borrowing, under section 178 of the Charter, with approval of the Inspector of Municipalities, and without elector consent. These provisions are in place to allow a council to make effective decisions within adopted financial plans. When a council determines that, in spite of these options, long-term borrowing is required, this commitment impacts taxpayers for a much longer period than that of the five-year financial plan. The need for accountability and transparency is key in such instances, to ensure your citizens understand and participate in establishing service priorities and are able to participate in the long-term decision making. The alternative approval process and referendum process provide such opportunities. ..... citizens may not always be keen on providing funds for emergency protection, which then directly impacts service delivery. However, this does not warrant changing legislation to remove the ability to have a say in commitments a council makes on their behalf.