Loading...
MINUTES - Special Council - 19660405~........--' ' ,., .. ' '.<).f, J.'' ,,,,; SPECIAL MEETING OF COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS 0~ TUESDAY, APRIL 5.1966 AT ':'.00 P1M. PRESENT MAYOR REEVE DEPUTY REEVE COUNCILLORS CF, DAVIS (IN THE CHAIR Jll.G. PATRICK R. SIMMONS . CORBETT, ILLINGWORTH, MURRAY, WILLIAMSON. Mayor Davis advised that this meeting had been called to present .the 1966.Budget. Mayor Davis thanked the Clerk, his staff, Town Superintendent .and. the Auditor Mr. D • Dunlop for their work in preparing this Budget. MURRAY: SIMMONS; "Resolved that each member of Counc;U who wishes to speak only once and for a time limit of five minutes." AMENDMENT TO MOTION ILLINGWORTH: WILLIAMSON: "Resolved that time be unlimited, as their is no time limit set in the Procedure By-law." AMENDMENT DEFEATED ~~MENT TO ORIGINAL MOTION DA'iHS, C. CORBERT: "REsolved that a time limit of 10 minutes be set." AMENDMENT CARRIED. REEVE PATRICK IN THE CHAIR Mayor Davis presented a report of the 1966 Finance Committee in which the Committee respectfully submit the following: Subsequent to meetings of the Finance Committee and Council the 1965 Budget estimates and recommend as follows: TOTAL ASSESSMENT 1. Real property Assessment used as a basis for computing business. assessment 2. Business As.sessment 3. Railway lands, pipelines and telepone assessment Assessment entitled to benefit $3,483,512. $1,621,885. $ 323, '7'76. $16,0'76,829. $ 5,429,1'73. $10,647,656. Based on the forgoing assesmment, the Committee recommends the 1966 taxation revenue as follows: '. SPECIAL COUNCIL 1966 BUDGET CONTINUED TAXATION PUBLIC SCHOOLS SEPARATE SCHOOLS HIGH SCHOOLS COUNTY RATES GENERAL LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL MILL RATES TOTAL REVENUE FROM TAXATION PER CAPITA GRANT OTHER REVENUE TOTAL EXPENDITURES -2 - RESIDENTIAL MILL RATE 26.07513 26.07513 19.07~92 13.88304 19.95641 78.98950 April ;~h.l966 · COMMERCIAL MILL RATE 28.97236 28.97236 21.19435 13,88304 23.49663 87;54638 AMOUNT OF LEVY $411,102. $ 23,833. $318,171. $223,105. $339,926. $ 11,639 $1,327,776. 37,672. 289,541. $1,654,989. DAVIS rC: "resolved tnat the report o.e•·the Finance Committee re the 1966 SIMMONS: DUd(.let be, ac'cepted and the Seal o:f'·t he Corporation be attached 'thereto and the Necessary Dy-law be preparecl.." .J ··" . Councillor Illingworth read the following brief: The action that we are taking here to-night will have an effect on the Town of Aurora and, all its citizens for the coming yearand possibly.: longer. Therefor., i:t is incumbent on eadh and everyone o:l> us, :>fhO have been ·eJ;ectEjd' to represent the citizens of Aurora, to think carefully ana With foresight up6n the ifc'E"ion which is a156ut to be taken. . . , . . . . . . .· .. . . . , , , . . The words. which follow are spoken. 'ai>ter: considerable· thought and deliber~ ':tt:l:on and represent my oWn personal thoughts' an<;J.,ppinions. ' . · · .. , . · . · · .. · I .cani}ot 'support the Budget as PFe.sented by the Chairni?,n, of the Finance Committee for iwq: primary reasons. The first reas_pn Js my concern ov,>:r : the method in ,wh::i,qb the :budget )las .. 'Qeen prepared. I realize that this is the' manner in which; it: has: always be€m e.arried out·, and this ie. part·· ·of tny concern;because the methOd liii@'awnen Aurora.)lad a popu).ation of 3,000 i.s not) necessarily t):le .'\<est method for to-day. Time and conditions change and. it is part of our responsibility to keep up with the· ,times •. ·.· Do. you r:>:alize. that in pr.eparation of this Budget only• 5 items, ,Jaave been discussed in open· Cour10il and they are. "' ' ' · 1. ,MEMBERSHIP FEE YOBK COUNTY WELFARE OFFICERS ASSOC. $ • 5. 00 2. AwAini To TOP AURORA sTUDENTs · · 4oo;oo .ANND:AL G;RANT TO J).GRICULTURE SOCIETY · 200.00 4 ... ANNUM,ii,GRANT TO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY 201).00 5, CONTRA¢T WITH AMBULANCE CO. . ·-' , 2., OQO, 00 TOTAL $2,805.00 Thl'l Eecreation Col!Lmittee;~_)l;<'i,get,yas pres·~~:tesJ..~ :j;o, Co1.1:n,cAI .~~: Feb~~ary 28~h.J,966, but no »~tion taken and rof',or;r,ed. -to,J,"in»nce C..ollllll;ltteee. Council.in Committee. 0 ' ' • ,,•' ,, ' ' 0 --· ' , '0 '' ', ' 'H 0 0 ' ' '' .I·, ., .. -.,. '' .'' \~' ',' . "·'I'·,- "•. i ·".: .. _-,·!_: :: ~' .,,.,,. L~-~-~'"""'--~=·,,..,..--~ "~----· ~-·,~- SPECIAL COUNCIL -3 -April 5;1966 The annual Police REport and Budget wase presented to Council on March 21st.1966 but no action taken at that time. It is agreed that many meeting s have beenheld by Council in Committee, but the majority of these meetings, comparision was made with previous years budg~Et &nd active expenditures rather than.a detailed analyisis. Although, I was absent on Monday, March 28th. due to other duti.es, and I understand Works Dept and Fire Dept. buddgets were discussed, I cannot reca.ll any detailed condieret.ion or discussion of any other Committee budget except that of the Police Committee on Wednesday, March :30th. which I will present in detail il:ter as my second reason. On March 21st when I presented in Council, a Police Committee report on the 1965 operation of the Dept. and the proposed budget for 1966, I was told prior to Council that it had never been done that way before, that the budget should go to the Finance Committee, that budgets were never discussed in Council. Gentlemen, I tell you now as I told you then, that I am not too much concerned about hhe manner in which things were done in the past. This is a new age, a new generation and as the late John Kennedy said, The age of mew problems, requiring new people, new solutions , new ideas." It is my contention and considered opinion that all Committee budgets should be presented and discussed in Council. Are we ashamed of our budget that they must be presented in secret? Do we feel that the citizens of the Aurora and the press do not have the right to know how we plan to spend their money? Gentlemen, we are elected representatives of the people and have a trust to uphold. How can be uphold that trust if we do not have the opportunity to consider, to discuss, to analize the various cc,~:;om·nt parts that make up the Budget. I know that. each of you is very concerned, as I am, about the increased cost of the operation of the· Town, and that everything possible has been done to keep the tax increase within. reasonable bounds, and that we have no reason to hide anything. Why then, do we continue to set Budget as was done in the past? Let us bring the busines.s of the Town into the open, so that all may have the right to know how their money is being spent. The second reason that I cannot support this budget is the cuts that were made in the Police Budget. On March 21st. on behalf of the Police Committee I presented a report dealing with the 1965 operation of the Police Dept. and our proposed budget for 1966. This report which had considerable bearing of· the proposed budget was not considered nor discussed and has not yet as a report been considered or discussed. Although copies of this report were distributed to all members of Council, it would appear that little or no thought or consideration was given and I refer in particular to paragraph 3 of the report -Strength of Force, which r~ads as follows: SPECIAL COUNCIL - 4 - April 4,1966 1966 BUDGET '1:' '·' present ratio of Police personnel to population is 1 for every 750. by the Ont- ario Police Commission. Based on this ratio, Aurora should have a minimum force of 1\ oen. Based on the former recommendet'. ratio of 1 for every 1,000 population, Aurora should have a minimum force of 10 men. At the present time we have 7 Officers plus the Chief ~onstable. Your Committee recommends that the Aurora Police Dept. ~.,......__~-~---~--- be brought up to a strength of 10 men plus the Chief Constable, by hiring one constable and one cadet as soon as possible and an additional cadet approx. July lst. It should ~e realized that even with a force of 10 men, covering 168 hours each week and allowing for training courses, vacations etc. that a maximum of only 2 men per shift is available. This does not allow for police personnel to be available for point duty, foot patrol, radar control, pa.rking control and various other complaints received. It is hoped that the additional strength will allow more time for the senior members of the Department to Act as prosecutors for traffic cases, and for more time for plain clothes detail to improve our investigation capabilities. In addition, the increasing traffic load has increased the number of traffic accidents by 60%, which has more than doubled the time for investigating and process- ing accident reports. lour Committee original submitted budget was a total of $99,621.97,. When it was realized thatt he amount could make an appreciable difference in the mill rate, a revised budget of $91,524.07 was presented, which ommittted the second cadet tobe hired approx. July lst. and other items. During the detailed discussion of the Police Budget on March 30th. Council in CommitteEj decided, that additional strength to the Police Dept. was not required and struck out the proposal to hire an additional constable and cadet. This resulted in a reduction ~ in the Police Budget to $85,191.07, or a saving of $6,330.00 It is my contention and considered opinion that the majority oft he members of the Council are penny wise and ~und foolish. Bearing in mind that the Police Budget of the Town of Aurora is under strength by any recognized standard, how can you gentlemen, as elect ed representatives bf the citizens of Aurora, reconcile the fact that you have acted in the best interest of the Tmrn. The saving of $6,333.00 represents a saving of just less than .l~ of a mill, or would mean an increase of $1.60 on the average tax. bill. Gentlemen, I am su:re the citizen of Aurora would rather pay an additional $1.60 and feel that the town is well policed. Listen to the words of the lead editorial from the Toronto Telegram dated, March 31st. Nothing is as important to the citizens of Metro Toronto as their security. Water , light, sewerage, roads, parks, schools, transportation, homes, business, life in fact rest on the foundation of a society secure from molestation and assured of the maintenance of law and order. An effective police force is vital to the protection , the good order and the vre"lbeing of a municipality as large, and growing larger and as complex, as Metro· -Toronto. At a time when crime is increasing the polioe force will continue to be under strength if the department is denied sufficient funds, Faced with ;ncreased costs, the Committee's desire to retrench and to limit the rise in the mill rate is understandable and commendable, But it is retrenching in the •rrong place. Much as people dislike potholes, for example, they al!e tolerable. As between adequate police protection and road repairs, there can be no question which has the higher priortiy. On no account should the security of the community be hazarded, -~·-x•~· ~~~~~~· r.'~--==~~ SPEC!AL COUNCIL - 5 - April 5,1966 There have been many snide remarks and innuendos expressed around this table about the quality and Efficiency of our Police Department. So much so that on April 12th. 1966 our Chief Constable wrote to each member o this Council and included a supply of compla~nt forms. To the best of my knowledge, not one single written complaint has bee.n received, but the remarks and the innuendos continue. Gent~emen, it is my contention and considered opinion that it is time for you to put up or shut up. If you have a valid complaint, it is your duty as a member of this Council and a citizen of the Town to submit such complaint for investigation and possible co-rective action. It is my opinion that you are letting your personal feelings and prejudices affect your normal good judgement in thinking of the best interest of Aurora. Therefore ILLINGWORTH: WILLIAMSON: " That the budget as submitted be amended to include the sum of $6,333.00 t· that a Police Constable and a Police Cadet may be added to the Aurora Police Force and I would request that this be a recorded vote." MAYOR C.F. DAVIS REEVE S.G. PATRICK DEPUTY REEVE R. SIMMONS COUNCILLOR C. CORBETT COUNCILLOR W. DAVIS (ABSENT) COUNCILLOR R. ILLINGWORTH COUNCILLOR D. MURR~Y COUNCILLOR W. TRE!IT (ABSENT) COUNCILLOR J. WILLIAMSON AMENfiME!H fiEFE~EB • YEA X X .'\.fieF a leagtey aiseaaaiea the lt!O'UON \lAS C:ARRIEfi. NAY X X X X X Mayor Davis stated that he >rould like to thank the Public School Board for attending a meeting with Council and cutting down their Budget. · Mayor Dav"is stated. 1 that when the budget was first discussed the mill rate was at 14.4 mills. SPECIAL COUNCIL -5A-April 5 ,1966 Mayor Dar is stated he did not like this last milll1te c r:l.tizism on bu <lget night. Mayor Davis aske.d -how nuch can the Town af'f ord. Crunci).lor Illingworth stated he did not know encugh last year to 'l)lestion method c£ p :reparing bu <lget. Deputy Reere Simmons stated that we are only trying to protect the citizens c£ Aurora, particular those on a limited bl. <lget. Councillor M.l rray stated that this b Iiaf' was the opinion c£ one man only, and COl neil membeiS hare other opi.nions, and that the majority rules. Cru ncillo r Ml. rray inf orroe d COl neil that last year-hardly an acccunt c£ the Police Department was not q1 estioned by Cru ncillor Illingworth and now the Police are little white f lowe IS. Cwncillor M.l r:ray. state.d that Council members are cone erne d about all citizens of: the Town. Ccuncillor Mlr:ray also stat.ed that last year when we had a change to impror e w r Town , re shopping plaza, Councillor Illingworth was against it. Councillor Illingworth adr ised Councillor M.t r:ray that he had only been critical c£ Petty Cash disbursements c£ the Police Department and that he had ner er been against increased assessment. Reeve Pat:rick stated that he had set in on erery Department bu<lget and erery Department has t rle.4 "to hold their budget's down as far as possible. Counci].).or ~rray stat.ed that :i;f' this amendment is to go through the CJP.lit (, '• '. . his St:af',;JI,,; :the Auditor will hare to spend two or three dey"s re calculating it again-,-·1ut:.P'llv·ing time and money. AMENDMEN':l\ .. \)Jl:l"EATED MOTION CARRIED. ·~----------~-----··----- ·-~,•A '-·-·· Sl'ECIAL COUNCIL 1966 BUDGET BY··LAW # 1680-66 CORBETT: lULL Ik1V1SON : -6 -April 5,1966 "That leave be given to introduce a By-law to levy the taxes for the year 1966 and to provide for the collection thereof, ancl that the same be now read a first time." CARRIED. The By-law was then read a first time. HURRAY: \VILLIAMSON" PATRICK: \HLLIAJ\ISON: SIMMONS: PA'!IlRICK PATRICK: CORBETT: PATRICK: CORBETT: The meeting then adjourned. "That the By-law now before the Council be read a second time and that the Council resolve itself into a Committee of the whole for that prupose." "That the second reading of the By-law be taken as read.11 CARRIED. "That the By-12.1< no>r before the Council be read a third time this day and that rule 22 of By-lmr No. 1468 be suspended for that purpose." "That the third reading of tl)e fl'-law be CARRIED. "That the meeting adjourn." CARRIED. taken as reo.d." :t/~10~ -~::~:/) (~_d~. /1 ~~fl-u) MAYOR CLERK