Mark Horseman

The “Windmill” decision is going to be discussed at Council tonight.  With this, I find it to be a great opportunity to share my thoughts on the separation of powers between different levels of Government.  As I discussed in my previous entry on Golf Courses, Governments should operate businesses that are optimized for accessibility.   Power generation and distribution is one such service.  Everyone needs power, to some degree, and everyone should be able to pay for and get power.  Therefore, the most efficient way to meet the accessibility need of power is to have one level of Government run it.

In Saskatoon, we have Saskatoon Light & Power.  They are an outfit run by the Civic Government that buys power from the Provincial crown and redistributes that power to people living in certain areas of the city.  Luckily enough, I live in a location that doesn’t require that I purchase my power from the Civic Government, although I still live in Saskatoon.  Already, as you can see, the downside of Government running things quickly creeps in.  The list of caveats that are appended to these agreements, some of them very old, are an expensive maintenance, that falls squarely on the taxpayer.

Recently, Saskatoon Light & Power has seen it necessary to get into the Power Generation business.  First they were part of an effort to lobby for a Civic run Hydro dam on the river, now they want a Windmill at the landfill (so the trash can, literally, hit the fan).   This is politically popular for many, as it promotes Green Energy, provides a revenue center, and creates jobs.  Who loses?  The taxpayer loses.  The taxpayer loses because we have two levels of Government providing power.  They’re working in isolation to define the energy mix of the province and city.  We have two sets of staff working to solve the same problem for the same area (electricity supply to Montgomery).  This is highly inefficient.

What needs to happen, moving forward, is the operations of Saskatoon Light & Power need to be handled by the Province.  One level of Government is all it takes to be involved in Power Supply and Distribution.  The Civic Government shouldn’t be pining for Power Generation as a revenue center, as the taxpayer ends up paying considerably more overhead for two sets of Government to clash on a solution.  It is in the best interest of the City, and it’s taxpayers, to have the Province in the Power Generation and Distribution business.  It would be more efficient for us all.

Many people in Saskatoon, and Saskatchewan as a whole, enjoy their rounds of golf in the spring, summer, and early fall.  I also enjoy the occasional round of golf.  The municipal courses in Saskatoon are fantastic and I also enjoy the multitude of courses in the entire province.  It’s quite nice to pay $20 to play the back 9 at a course, and at many courses this is a possibility, not just the municipal courses.

There are two ways that a service, like golfing, can be offered to the public.  A service can be optimized for accessibility, or it can be optimized for profit.  A service should be optimized for accessibility if it is a requirement, things like drinking water, safe roads, reliable electricity, and telecommunications (phone, and arguably, internet).  Otherwise, services should be optimized for profit, things like restaurants, mining companies, financial planners, and golf courses.  Governments are uniquely equipped to do very well at optimizing a service for accessibility (by spending tax dollars to offer the service).  The private sector is well suited to optimizing a service for profit (and thus creating jobs and paying taxes to all three levels of government).

Saskatoon’s fantastic municipal golf courses are operated such that they are revenue neutral.  The concept of the municipal government golf course is an idea from the 1920’s, when it was very expensive to run and maintain a golf course.  The only way for a golf course to exist that the majority of the public could play on is if government operated it.  This is still true for a number of similar services, like pools and the Forestry Farm (and to the latter, my kids are proud to donate to yearly).  Golf courses are demonstrably no longer in this category.  I can pay $22 to golf the back-9 at a private course, or I can pay $17 to golf the back-9 at Silverwood.  There’s no reason for any level of Government to operate a golf course for accessibility.  The golf courses would still exist and still be affordable if operated privately.  If privately run, it would be an opportunity for the Civic government to actually have a revenue stream from them, in the form of taxation.

Governments are not well suited to run services “for profit” or design effective revenue centers in the traditional business fashion.  Governments are not businesses, they shouldn’t pretend to be, and they can’t be effectively run as a business.  I’ve heard many people, some Councillors included, turn the phrase, “The Civic Government should be run as a business”.  I suppose when you’re a hammer, every problem is a nail.  Here’s an interesting and relevant case study as to why this is wrong.  Lets say government operates a golf course.  The golf course wishes to implement a new policy around the attire of its customers.  The golf course itself does not have the authority to make any change, any policy change must happen at the government level.  What then follows is a public debate on acceptable attire for golfers at the government owned golf course.  If the course was privately owned, the owner could wake up one morning and hang a sign saying, “No Shirt, no Shoes, no Service”.  Instead, we have Councillors and administrators drawing their hefty salary to debate what type of clothes people wear and what’s acceptable.  That’s not a free debate to have, it costs taxpayers the salaries of all the politicians and administration involved.

It’s time for the City of Saskatoon got out of the Golfing business.  This, of course, isn’t an easy overnight change.  In my belief the Government would need to be responsible in the sale of the golf courses to a private interest and have assurances that they would continue to operate as golf courses.   Civic officials need to extend that offer and see if there are any takers.   After which, we’d be one step closer to a more efficient, transparent, and effective Civic Government.

As I read the Star Phoenix’s fantastic coverage of the Civic “Preliminary” budget, I’m left with a gut feeling.

Citizens should expect more from their Council.  Saskatoon is growing, and growth places demands on infrastructure and services which are reflected in this budget.  That growth also carries with it downtown revitalization and other amenities.

What this budget fails to do is offer people a clear plan on tackling our growing debt servicing as a result of our Capital budget, provide direction on how the city will keep tax increases to a minimum over the next four years, or offer any strategic insights on how revenue could be increased.

One item I’d like to bring to the table is selling the civic stake in Saskatoon Light & Power to the Province.  There’s no need for us to be in the business of power distribution or defining the energy mix of the city.  This could be done cheaper for all tax payers if it was managed by a single level of government.  What happened to running a smaller, leaner, more efficient Civic Government?  We can work with the Province to make it happen.