Municipalities deliver many of the services that residents rely on every day — services that shape quality of life, support local economic activity, protect public health and safety, and help build strong, connected communities. At the same time, the cost of providing these services continues to rise, driven by inflation, infrastructure pressures, changing service expectations, regulatory requirements, and limits on available revenue. Councils are therefore faced with increasingly difficult choices: which services should be offered, what level of service is appropriate, who benefits, and how the cost should be shared between the general tax base and individual users.

In this environment, transparent and defensible decision-making is essential. A clear framework for determining the appropriate level of public subsidy and for setting user fees where applicable, helps councils make consistent choices that are financially responsible, fair to residents, and aligned with community priorities.

How does your municipality set its fees and charges?  Thumb in the air and squinting with one eye?? Try to be somewhere in the middle of your comparators? Well guess what- that's what your comparators are doing as well. You are now "comparably uncomparable"!

The question is not 'how much should we charge?'. The question should be, 'how much should we subsidize?'.  Subsidizing services is Council's prerogative- and its OK.  ACCIDENTAL subsidy is not.

So, how does Council decide on how much subsidy to provide. Obviously the pie is only so big.  Does your municipality have a system for determining subsidy levels that is defensible to your residents?  Does it align with Councils (small 'p') priorities?

If a resident asked you how the fees and charges have been set- would you be able to answer them? 

At its core, the Public Service Bargain is an unwritten agreement between elected officials and public servants. It exists to ensure governments have the expertise, continuity, and commitment needed to carry out the democratic mandate entrusted to them by voters. Public servants agree to set aside their personal political views, remain publicly non-partisan, maybe even give up more lucrative career opportunities for their dedication to service, and work faithfully to implement the decisions of the elected government. In return, they expect a respectful workplace, professional loyalty from those they serve, career stability, and the opportunity to provide honest, objective advice. Elected officials, in turn, receive what is often described as "fearless advice and loyal implementation." Fearless advice means public servants provide elected officials with the best information, evidence, and options available—even when that advice may be uncomfortable to hear. Loyal implementation means that once a lawful decision has been made, public servants carry it out professionally, regardless of their personal opinions or preferences.

In recent years, however, there have been many—some would say almost daily—examples of this informal agreement being strained. Public servants have increasingly been criticized publicly (locally or more broadly), ridiculed, or portrayed as obstacles by the very elected officials they serve. When this happens, the public service bargain begins to weaken.

If this trend continues, governments at every level may find it more difficult to attract and retain talented professionals who are willing to speak honestly to those in positions of authority. Over time, there is a risk that fearless advice becomes less common, and slowly replaced by advice that is less clear and less honest, or worse....... advice that appeases the politicians to keep one’s job. The delicate balance erodes to a point where there is no unbiased and fearless advice- only an echo chamber.  At the same time, the spirit of loyal implementation can also suffer.

In a municipal context, the answer is not simply to expect either side to "do better." Instead, Councils and Chief Administrative Officers need to have open, honest conversations about the Public Service Bargain, what each party should expect from the other, and how they will work together. Establishing clear expectations—whether through a code of conduct, governance protocols, or mutually agreed-upon operating principles—can go a long way toward strengthening trust and preserving the healthy working relationship that effective local government depends upon.