See what a little pressure and taxpayer outrage can do. City council is now scheduled to meet Friday morning to discuss re-opening Budget 2003 and cutting costs to avoid a 6.5% residential property tax hike.

Over the long weekend Mayor Chiarelli - sensing that the no tax hikes train had left the station without him on it - did his best to speed ahead of the train by announcing that property tax bills (due out at month's end) had been put on hold. He also mused that "everything" is on the table in his and council's frenetic rush to avoid hiking taxes and avoid being turfed in this November's elections like lemmings off a cliff.

This Friday taxpayers must show up en masse to follow through on their emails, faxes and calls to city hall. And we should settle for nothing less than the full 6.5% expenditure cut to ensure that the Mayor and council keep their Budget 2003 tax freeze promise.

In terms of cuts, some councillors will point to road improvement work as a big-ticket item to scale back, others will argue for delays in infrastructure projects. Taxpayers need to keep the heat on over the next 48 hours and argue for program streamlining and tackling the admittedly tough issue of staff cuts. If council is not prepared to take a sharp pencil to its number one expense - wages - then we're bound to repeat this exercise over and over again. As well, council should commit to a longer term "core service review."

Here's a preview of what a few councillors are likely to say on Friday given their emails to me. Wendy Stewart (River ward) wrote: "I intend to support Gord Hunter's motion to reopen the 2003 budget and vote to reduce city spending to deliver a tax freeze." Fiscal conservative Jan Harder, (Bell-South Nepean) said she "felt like the lone ranger" before the public uproar against a 6.5% tax hike gathered momentum.

But by far and away, the best assessment of city council's current predicament came from Glen Brooks (Rideau ward). He wrote, "Until this council clearly enunciates its priorities, supported by the general public, spending is going to continue to be out of control. Simply, put we are spending more than we are taking in, a formula for a financial crash! In 2001, I wrote are article predicting a serious financial crunch in 2004. It looks like I was out by 6 months. Well, maybe, for I still believe a bigger crunch will occur in the 2004 budget."

Scary but likely prophetic words from Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brook's also seems to understand the bigger picture unlike some of his colleagues who have tried to portray the assessment tax shift from business - admittedly due to provincial legislation - onto homeowners as some sort of windfall for business. .

He states, "let us not forget what sector generates wealth in this country. Let us also be cognizant that it is the collective small businesses that drive our
economy. Continue to tax them out of business (check all the new fees, licenses, development charges now imposed since amalgamation) then we shall see truly uncontrollable tax increases, just to maintain what infrastructure we have now."

Finally, let's not get lulled into believing the Mayor is a hero on this file. He and all of his colleagues - save three - were initially content to just hike our taxes by 6.5% and sit back and blame the province. Only after the proverbial fecal matter hit the fan was a change of tune evident.

City council must find the 6.5% savings this Friday. But it begs two more questions. Why did it take property tax revolt to force council to cut costs and enunciate priorities? Isn't this the job they were elected to do - and failed to do this past January - back in November 2000?