[SteelTown]

Council votes to drag its feet for a year

Andrew Deschel

Mayor Fred Eisenberger has developed a real knack for putting his foot in his mouth when it comes to dealing with area rating.

Last year, while arguing in favour of putting off a decision so as not to offend the suburbs that benefit from the unfair tax policy, he maintained that, “Harmony overrides fairness.”

Yesterday, while squeaking out an 8-7 victory to once again defer the vote, Eisenberger was at it again.

But this time, he even topped his previous groaner.

“It takes the city of Hamilton three months to change its underwear if something has to be done by committee,” he said.

Truth to tell, he had already trotted out that line the day before while visiting The Spec editorial board to promote his idea of hiking the controversial issue off to a citizens’ jury.

He used it by way of justifying why a citizens’ group would need a full year to study the matter.

Oddly, Eisenberger seems blissfully unaware of how badly that statement reflects on him.

Here he is, the mayor, sardonically commenting on how long it takes to get things done in Hamilton as if he has no say or is helpless in the face of a prevailing inertia.

And yet, at the same time, he’s using the observation as if it somehow justifies his push to delay making a decision until after the next election, a full year from now.

It’s as if Eisenberger has never heard the admonition that if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.

Make no mistake, Eisenberger is certainly a big part of the footdragging problem in this case.

Let’s briefly recap.

Area rating is a tax system used since amalgamation to cushion suburban tax rates by permitting different areas to pay lower amounts, depending on the recreation, fire and transit services they receive.

The system, however, doesn’t always accurately reflect how services are actually delivered, which means, in some cases, the old inner city is subsidizing the more affluent suburbs.

City staff studied the issue for more than a year and produced a report outlining options, including a compromise recommendation that more fairly aligns taxation to costs and service levels.

Problem is, overhauling the system will mean suburban tax increases, which is anathema to suburban councillors.

That’s why yesterday’s 8-7 vote virtually split along suburbaninner city lines.

Bob Bratina was the only inner city councillor who voted in favour of Eisenberger’s idea of handing the hot potato off to a citizens’ group, which will report back after the 2010 municipal election.

Eisenberger insists the timing has nothing to do with political convenience.

But that’s pure banana oil. If that wasn’t the case, he and the suburban councillors would have supported Councillor Tom Jackson’s amendment to change the reporting date for the citizens’ group to June of next year.

That would have allowed for six months of public consultation and still given this council an opportunity to vote on the change instead of handing it off to the next council to deal with.

Jackson’s amendment lost 8-7, with the mayor leading the charge against it.

Eisenberger’s drive to put off dealing with this touchy issue until after voters have gone to the polls clearly erodes his credibility as a new-style politician.

I’ve said before that Eisenberger is growing in the job. I suppose this is more proof of it. His ducking and weaving suggest he’s added old-style political expediency and procrastination to his bag of tricks.

Under his leadership, council has put off for tomorrow what could have been done today.

Three months to change your underwear is no longer enough time in Hamilton.

Mayor Fred has raised the bar to 12 months.