Councillors ambushed while public ignored

Opinion

There’s something odd about this story. It raises many serious questions about the way in which money is spent at Brandon City Hall and decisions are made at the city council table.

On Monday night, Brandon Riverbank Inc., the non-profit entity that operates the Riverbank Discovery Centre, asked city council to advance next year’s $250,000 capital grant to it immediately in order to help pay the balance owed by Riverbank for approximately $1.8 million in projects — the Peter Sawatzky Sculpture Garden, Discovery Gardens and a solar array on the roof of the Riverbank Discovery Centre.

In his presentation to council, Riverbank executive director Dean Hammond said “We’re fully paying for those three projects … It’s just a timing thing where the cash flow is an issue at the moment.” He explained that the corporation didn’t expect the projects to be undertaken at the same time — he called it an “unforeseen situation” — but that having to pay for all three now has created a cash flow problem that could be solved by council advancing the 2026 funding right now.

He warned councillors that a delay in financing of two to three weeks would be “manageable,” but that “anything more than that would be difficult.” He said that Riverbank could obtain a line of credit through its “friendly banker,” but expressed the concern the organization would have to pay interest for that financing. In his view, receiving the money from the city was the “easiest solution.”

In response, Coun. Bruce Luebke (Ward 6) complained that he had only found out about the funding request hours earlier, while Coun. Greg Hildebrand (Ward 5) raised the concern that Riverbank could be making similar pleas in future years. In the end, the request was approved, with Luebke being the lone vote opposing the bailout.

So many questions come to mind, starting with the obvious one: How could this situation be “unforeseen?” Is Hammond seriously suggesting the projects were carried out without Riverbank’s knowledge and consent? More importantly, how could Riverbank undertake those projects without certainty that it had the cash to pay for them?

Or, did Riverbank incur the costs on the assumption city council would come to its rescue? If so, did anybody at city hall provide that assurance without city council’s knowledge? If so, when and under what authority?

That leads to even more questions: Why were some or all city councillors ambushed by the funding request? Who, if anybody, at the council table knew about the problem prior to Monday’s council meeting? Why were some or all councillors — and Brandon taxpayers — kept in the dark?

Is this yet another case of our part-time councillors being treated like unimportant rubber-stampers? If so, is it another argument in favour of full-time councillors?

On the money side of the issue, how is it possible for the city to come up with $250,000 in unbudgeted funds on such short notice, at a time when we are told it is strapped for cash? Where does this money actually come from? It isn’t in the 2025 budget, and the 2026 budget won’t be voted on until next March.

Is there some sort of petty cash slush fund with more than $250,000 in it? If so, does that mean our taxes are too high?

The city’s director of finance, Troy Tripp, said the money would be expensed in 2026, as part of next year’s budget, but (1) it’s being paid out in 2025 and (2) neither he nor council can assume it will be in a budget that hasn’t even been drafted yet, let alone deliberated, discussed at a public hearing and passed by council, as legally required.

As to Hammond’s argument that obtaining the money from the city would protect Riverbank from having to pay interest on a line of credit, the former city treasurer ignored the impact it would have on the city’s finances. Aren’t taxpayers already paying interest on millions of dollars of debt already? Can we really afford to pay even more?

It would be one thing if this was a truly rare situation, but it isn’t. On Monday night, council also voted to allocate another $200,000 to the Park Community Centre redevelopment project at the request of the provincial government. That is on top of the $1.2 million already committed by council to the project, and tenders haven’t even been issued yet.

That request wasn’t on the council meeting’s agenda either, which means the public was blindsided twice in one meeting. The Park funding was apparently discussed in a private council meeting prior to the public meeting, but the public has no access to those meetings.

I support the Park Community Centre project, but what happened at Monday’s council meeting — the allocation of almost half a million dollars in unbudgeted taxpayer dollars without advance notice to councillors and the public — appears to be just the latest instalment of loosey-goosey practices at the city council table that deny councillors adequate time to review and consider proposals, and steamroll the rights and interests of ordinary citizens in our local democracy.

This has to stop. The rules and processes are there for a reason. They promote transparency and accountability. They enable an informed public to make their concerns known and, as a result, help to prevent mistakes being made by our city council.

And if there’s one thing we really need at city hall right now, it’s fewer mistakes.