Our view: Community Support

It’s a tough job keeping a community’s social, environmental and economic benefits prioritized, balanced and equitable.

It’s a tough job keeping a community’s social, environmental and economic benefits prioritized, balanced and equitable.

The city’s newly elected officials deserve a pat on the back for aiming to leave Rossland in better shape and more sustainable then when they first sat.

It was responsible of council to look at overall demands on the city’s budget prior to assessing community support funding and a great idea to set a cap of seven per cent of the city’s tax revenue for this purpose.

Sure, some community groups were disappointed they did not receive the taxpayer hand out they were hoping, for but council took into consideration many factors when allocating these funds.

In a market-driven environment there has to be structure and criteria around who receives what and why. The public can be satisfied when it is possible to look up justifiable reasoning and from this information make broader decisions — such as should I invest in Rossland? It is a fine balance between keeping taxes low to entice others to purchase property and invest here and on the other hand provide a vibrant community with an abundance of services.

We are not saying that these organizations are not worthy of more funding.  Rossland would definitely be more vibrant if we could throw bucket loads of loonies at each organization and build them into elite entities.

It is ultimately the taxpayer who pays for these community organizations and while council determines how the funds are spent it is the people who determine if they will invest here and ultimately contribute to the city’s budget.

To conclusively allow the people to decide, community groups should be looking for other revenue streams to be financially stable and the city needs to develop comprehensive policies around who and what taxpayer money will fund.