Despite pleas from a handful of residents urging them to “tighten their belts”, the City of Langford has agreed to make changes to its travel expenditure policy, including a $20 boost to their daily allowance for meals.
“While this council's appetite for travel, conferences and buying recreation centres may be bottomless, the taxpayers' pockets are not,” said Lisa Foxhall at a meeting on Nov. 4.
“Colwood expenses are $22,000, [Langford’s] are $68,000,” said Wendy Hobbs, referring to information available in both council’s ‘Statement of Financial Information’ for 2023.
“So if anything, you need to cut expenses, not increase it.”
“You guys should be tightening your belts and trying to save us some money, not spending it,” added another resident.
While increasing the ‘per diem’ for meals and incidental costs from $60 to $80, Langford’s updated travel expenditure policy does include changes to encourage money-saving. These include carpooling and sharing taxis when travelling together, and restrictions on claiming expenses if meals are provided as part of the event.
It was also noted the policy has not been updated since 2006, with one resident pointing out if the allowance had been raised in line with inflation over the years, it would be closer to $90.
“The proposed increase to $80 is completely reasonable,” said Frazer Johnson, speaking in support of the changes at the meeting.
“In real terms this is less than what the policy was when it was first enacted 18 years ago,” said Coun. Keith Yacucha later in the meeting. “So in that sense, there [are] real cost savings even built into this.”
The city is also exploring the possibility of adding ‘dependent care’ as a qualifying cost for reimbursement to the policy.
“I recognize that when you go away to work and you leave your family behind there are significant consequences that come alongside that,” said Coun. Colby Harder, adding she felt the city would be on the “leading edge” by exploring such a policy.
But the possible inclusion of the new expense had some locals confused, pointing to a lack of information about what ‘dependent care’ means.
“I don't know any company, business or council that pays their staff for dependent care,” said Hobbs, who urged the council to show due diligence and gather more information before making a decision.
And some councillors agreed, explaining the information was too vague.
“I'm not clear on what kind of types [of dependent care] we are talking about,” said Coun. Mary Wagner. “Babysitting? Are we talking about overnight care?”
Councillors unanimously agreed at the meeting to instruct staff to prepare a report about ‘dependent care’, which will be considered at a later date.
