An open letter to CRD Chair Richmond and CRD Directors.
My letter is to register my concern, dismay, and frustration as a taxpayer with respect to the recent decision to create a new staff support position in the CRD Cariboo Chilcotin Recreation budget line item.
As presented at the recent Joint Committee this position was put forward as a result of the burn-out of volunteers at the Esler Complex.
Also at the same meeting the proposal for funding the position was $80,000 plus benefits.
As a taxpayer one can only have serious questions about this decision.
Firstly, when was the CRD mandated to create staff support positions as a result of burn out of volunteers?
There must be a multiplicity of groups and agencies with volunteers who must be near burn-out.
It would be my contention this decision is absolutely inappropriate.
Secondly, this decision seems to be counter to any consideration of priorities.
It would appear to this taxpayer that there is a monumental failure of governance when (1) there is not a set of priorities established by taxpayers/board which guides decisions, and (2) when there is a multiplicity of over a hundred line items where it would appear CRD decision makers are trying to be all things to all people rather than to operate on established and defined priorities.
If the CRD board in its wisdom deems that it has money to spend, surely priorities such as contributing to a $2 million reserve for the CMRC pool, infrastructure maintenance, re-evaluation of Central Cariboo Search and Rescue funding, and Central Cariboo Regional Hospital District funding, would all be higher priorities than creating another staff support position with benefits.
I resent having to pay another per cent on the recreation line item for this new position and benefits and I certainly resent the view that some may see this as this as only a $3/100,000 increase.
As I understand it, this new $80,000 position and benefits would cost approximately $3.19 per 100,000 of assessed value in the first year … and more each year thereafter.
A reminder to directors that this is taxpayer money and that this decision would be a tax increase.
John C. Andrews,
Area D resident