CATCH  News – June 3, 2010
 Massive  underspending on infrastructure confirmed
A new study has confirmed that the  city needs to spend at least $120 million more each and every year to  fix roads and other infrastructure. The report has some politicians  pushing for more federal and provincial government grants, but at least  one councillor is suggesting it’s time to stop building things we can’t  afford to repair.
The city’s first  provincially-required 
Tangible Capital Assets Report was presented to  yesterday’s audit and administration committee. It records  under-spending in Hamilton of $120.3 million last year on items such as  roads, bridges, underground pipes, and water and sewer pipes and  facilities.
“Based on the estimated replacement  cost  of $15.8 billion, an annual sustainable spending level to ensure  that our assets are replaced and redeveloped in a timely manner would be  approximately $333 million,” says the 
staff report accompanying the study. “Capital  spending on asset replacement and redevelopments in 2009 amounted to  $213.1 million, which resulted in a gap of $120 million.”
Similar shortfalls have 
gone  on for years, and raising this amount from property taxes would  require about a 25 percent increase in current rates or more. Last  year’s deficit was actually lower than normal because the city 
received  substantial stimulus funding from senior levels of government. 
The biggest deficit ($91 million) in  2009 
was in road spending, with water and wastewater  facilities short $24.9 million and a deficit of $24.8 million for  “underground and other networks”. The purchase of more than the average  number of new buses last year meant that category had spending $15.6  million above the annual target.
Chad Collins and Terry Whitehead  encouraged city staff to seek more funding from senior levels of  government, with Collins proposing that road monies be the only requests  made for any future infrastructure dollars. Council put road projects  at the top of a long list submitted for stimulus funding, but the items 
actually supported were mainly for water projects  and recreational facilities.
“When the programs come out at the  provincial and federal level, does it make sense for us not to put  anything else on the list, except for roads projects,” Collins  suggested. “Maybe it’s a lesson learned for us, in light of what  happened last time. I understand that we were trying to capture as much  money as possible, but at the end of the day, making that list larger  than maybe it should have been has probably cost us something as it  relates to the infrastructure deficit related to roads and other  projects like sidewalks and sort of water issues.”
Bob Bratina responded with a quite  different approach.
“This looks to me like somebody’s got  four clunker cars they can’t afford to fix, so he goes out and buys  another car,” the ward two councillor observed. “And the comment that I  hear at the table today is well the province didn’t give us enough money  to fix these roads. I’m not very good at this accounting stuff, but  this seems fairly simple to me. We keep building infrastructure we can’t  afford to fix.”
City finance chief Rob Rossini  responded that the report showed “how much stuff we actually own” and  suggested that reduction is one of the objectives of the province in  requiring the reports.
“Part of the rationale for the  province doing this is for municipalities to look at their assets as to  which ones do we still need, which ones can we surplus and rationalize  on a going forward basis,” Rossini noted. “So I think that’s part of the  underlying thing that the province wants us to do.”
Bratina pointed to the recent  decision of well-known investor Warren Buffet who “just bought a  railway” because he’s calculating its value will climb over the long  haul.
“He said that the US highway system  infrastructure is so broken down they can’t possibly fix it all to the  level of sustaining the need for transportation. So he picked railroads.  We’re not alone in this.”
Collins countered with a brief  history of federal and provincial government 
cuts to  transfers to municipalities over the last 15 years.
“While it’s all well and good that  the books look a little better at the other levels of government, it’s  come at the expense of municipalities, and all municipalities over the  last decade have lobbied both levels of government for additional  infrastructure funds to try and get back some of those historic  traditional transfer payments that we were accustomed to utilizing over  several decades,” he stated, urging staff to make more lobbying for  increased payments a top priority.
Whitehead closed out the discussion  by recounting Prime Minister Harper’s speech last weekend to the meeting  of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities where the federal leader 
warned the focus of his government is on deficit  reduction, not more stimulus funding. He said the city should expect to  continue to get federal gas tax monies, but not additional funds.
That grant totals nearly $32 million a  year – two-thirds of which was 
allocated  to roads with the remainder helping pay for city hall renovations.
Councillors were 
told  in January that the city is adding an average of 50-70 kilometre lanes  of roadway each year and that annual maintenance costs for each  kilometre lane are roughly $10,000. That 
report estimated that the infrastructure spending  deficit is about $150 million a year.