Welland Mayor Frank Campion questioned over budget veto powers

In a previous interview, he said the strong mayor power legislation, now part of the Municipal Act, says a mayor shall create a budget.

The mayor took the terminology, “shall,” as meaning he must, and said he is following the legislation.

Under the new process, there is a 30-day window to complete the budget, which gives council until Dec. 6 to approve it.

Campion presented a proposed 2.68 per cent tax increase, with councillors given time to propose amendments, in writing, for things they’d like to see added or removed from the budget.

On Monday, there were 16 operating and capital budget amendments and six on the water/wastewater side.

Ward 6 Coun. Bonnie Fokkens tried to slash $385,000 on the operating and capital budget side, with Ward 5 Coun. Graham Speck trying to take out $150,000, and others adding various items.

You might be interested in

• Dec 31, 1969
• Comments

• Dec 31, 1969
• Comments

By the end of the meeting, the proposed tax rate sat at 3.43 per cent, with further amendments to come Tuesday before the final budget is set.

Last year, residents saw a 3.05 per cent decrease in their municipal tax bill, a result of the uploading of transit costs to Niagara Region.

At Monday’s meeting, Speck questioned the amendment process and Campion’s veto power.

He heard councillors had to submit their proposed amendments in writing by Nov. 23 and 30. The Nov. 23 amendments were debated this week.

City clerk Tara Stephens said if the mayor wanted to veto an amendment, he would have to do so in writing following the meeting and post it on the city’s website so council and residents would be aware of it.

“If the mayor doesn’t agree with something, he may veto it,” said Stephens.

Council would then have 10 days to try to override that veto through a two-thirds vote.

If Campion chooses to use the veto power, councillors would have until Dec. 19 at the latest to change things. If they decide not to fight the mayor, the budget would pass with his changes.

Speck also questioned the process for amendments.

He asked if those passed conditionally Monday could be debated again this coming Tuesday, especially by councillors who may have been absent.

Chief administrative officer Rob Axiak said city staff would prefer not to have a second debate on the same items, adding one of the reasons is to prevent the budget meeting from timing out before it is the spending envelope is approved.

Axiak said there could be some limited debate on why someone wants to remove one of the conditional amendments.

Items that did not make it on the conditional list can’t be brought back up, councillors also heard.

For Ward 2 Coun. David McLeod, three amendments on the water/wastewater side that found no support can’t come back Tuesday.

McLeod was frustrated when none of his fellow councillors seconded bringing any up for debate.

“The interim chief financial officer (Elizabeth Pankoff) has done her work and provided a summary. Why would we not even discuss the difference,” said McLeod, referring to the budget and his proposed amendments.

He made the comment as a point of privilege, but Campion said it wasn’t one.

“This is a failing in the process, that’s all I am saying Mr. Mayor,” McLeod said.

The mayor said it’s council’s prerogative whether it supports amendments or not, and that the meeting needed to move.

“Yeah, this is awesome,” McLeod said.

That comment led to Speck raising a point of privilege.

“The comment that I heard, I won’t repeat it, is basically derogatory to all of council for not seconding his amendments. I can see the councillor is upset.

“The point is, he is ridiculing council for not seconding his amendments, which I don’t think is fair to the rest of us,” said Speck, who asked McLeod to repeat it.

Campion said he didn’t hear anything derogatory, and told Speck he couldn’t make the Ward 2 councillor repeat what he said.

The mayor added he did hear McLeod’s frustration, but didn’t think it was an insult unless he missed something.

“It wasn’t a derogatory comment and wasn’t directed at anybody. I simply stated that it was awesome. If anyone took offence to that, I will apologize for that comment,” McLeod said.