Council Debrief — What Does a Level of Service Actually Cost?

The September 16 Diamond Valley Council meeting had a relatively short public agenda, but one discussion offered a useful look behind the curtain at how municipal budgets are built.

During Question Period, I asked about something contained in the Town’s 2027 Budget Guidelines: service levels.

My question was:

As Administration prepares the 2027 budget, the budget guidelines identify clear and defined service levels as a way to optimize resources and reduce costs. Will the budget process identify the actual cost of delivering major municipal service levels so Council can see where changes in service levels could produce measurable operating savings that could be redirected toward critical infrastructure?

Mayor Brendan Kelly called it a “really good question” and said Council likes to see questions like this as it enters the budget cycle. Administration’s answer, in its simplest form, was yes.

What Is a Service Level?

Municipal budgets aren’t only about deciding how much money to spend.

Council also has to decide what level of service residents should receive for that money.

Administration explained that many municipal service levels are already established through Council-approved policies and standards. Snow removal and grass mowing were given as examples. Administration then determines the resources needed to provide those services and identifies the associated operating and capital costs.

That creates an important relationship:

Service Level → Resources Required → Cost

Change the service level, and the cost may change as well.

The Mayor used a practical example. Residents may want snow removed sooner or grass cut more frequently, but increasing that service can require additional operating dollars. Council therefore has to consider the additional cost and whether the resulting benefit warrants it.

The reverse question is just as useful during a budget discussion:

Could a service be delivered differently while still providing an acceptable result—and would doing so create meaningful savings?

Putting a Dollar Figure on the Choice

Administration said that if Council wants to consider changing a particular service level, it can provide information about the financial implications, operational impacts and associated risks.

That gives Council information to determine whether potential savings are meaningful and whether money could be redirected toward other priorities, including infrastructure.

There are limits to how precise those numbers can be.

Weather-dependent services are a good example. We don’t know beforehand how much snow will fall next winter or how quickly grass will grow next summer. Administration therefore also looks at historical expenditures and previous years when developing estimates. Some years a service may exceed its budget; in others it may come in under budget.

But the underlying principle remains useful:

If we understand what a service costs, we are better able to understand the choices being made about it.

That will be something worth looking for when the 2027 budget comes before Council.

One Phrase Worth Watching: “User Pay”

Another interesting part of the response went somewhat beyond my original question.

Council said it has been moving toward a user-pay approach “where it is appropriate,” giving utilities and planning services as examples.

The reasoning presented at the meeting was that, where appropriate, more of the cost of providing a service is borne by those using the service rather than through general taxation.

The important words may be “where it is appropriate.”

Municipal services aren’t all alike. Depending upon the service, there can be questions about what the fee is intended to accomplish, how much of the actual cost it recovers, who uses the service, who benefits from having it available, and whether changing the way we pay for it creates other effects.

The September 16 discussion didn’t go into those questions, so there isn’t a conclusion to draw from it yet.

For now, “user pay” is simply a phrase worth remembering as the 2027 budget develops.

A Short Agenda — But a Useful Answer

Council also unanimously approved amendments to its Signing Authorities and Electronic Signatures Policy and dealt with an updated Assessment Review Board Bylaw.

During the Assessment Review Board discussion, Administration noted that residents or business owners who have concerns about their property assessment are encouraged to speak with the Town’s assessor before proceeding to a formal assessment appeal. Council subsequently gave the new bylaw its required readings.

The public portion of the meeting then ended shortly after 6:15 p.m., with Council returning to a closed session.

For such a short meeting, though, Question Period produced something useful.

We now know that Administration says service-level costs and analysis are available to Council during budget deliberations, and that changes can be examined for their financial, operational and risk implications.

So as the 2027 budget comes forward, there is another question residents can keep in mind:

Not simply “How much are we spending?” but “What level of service are we receiving for that spending?”

Sometimes understanding a municipal budget begins with understanding what we’re actually paying to accomplish.

Link

Council Debriefs https://www.sustainablelife.biz/category/council-debrief-series/