On the eve of the 24 Hours of the Téléthon, what better way to warm up than a city council meeting? Hours of discussions, not always productive, but how can one curb the appetite for verbosity (often lacking eloquence)?
In any case, citizens can rest assured: the elected officials are in good psycho-physical shape and handle the distance well.
The day began with a local version of the “commedia dell’arte”: before the mayor of Nice asked the council to vote on his decision to withdraw the last delegation from him, Auguste Verola—the “disloyal” councilor for the municipal majority, and the “victim of a base revenge” according to Benoît Kandel (opposition councilor) due to his alignment with Eric Ciotti in the “good” war between Ciotti and Christian Estrosi for local supremacy—preempted by resigning from his executive post: “I remain as a councilor,” he declared before exiting the chamber.
In short, the chapter is closed.
The main item on the agenda was the debate on budgetary orientations, a classic discussion ground between the majority and various and diverse oppositions.
Constructive (“for the first time since 2012, the overall operating grant should no longer decrease”) and bold (“I am among the mayors, even right-wing ones, who are not opposed to the progressive abolition of the housing tax by 2020 but favor an objective-based contract that prioritizes the funding of investment expenditures over operating ones with a bonus-malus system that rewards good performances and penalizes bad ones”), the mayor of Nice and his “treasurer” Philippe Pradal, first deputy, presented the main lines of the budget to be voted on in March:
Firstly, operating expenses will be tightly controlled with substantial savings (“we will go further than the programming law requires us, which asks us to limit their growth to +1.2%” said Christian Estrosi, who plans for a net reduction in management charges of more than 10 million euros in 2018).
Secondly, maintaining unchanged tax rates: property tax at 23.12% as in 2009; housing tax at 21.10% compared to 21.33% in 2009 (here, the mayor “forgets” the 10% increase in the first year of his term and the subsequent 5% reduction in abatements in 2014, which mathematically affects the rates each year).
Thirdly, investments that are projected at 85 million euros annually for 2018-2020: “investment is my priority for the city to continue to thrive and for a renewed quality of life”—a nice campaign slogan (and 2020 will be an election year).
New: a tax credit will be granted to innovative investors. We await the mechanism and details.
Financially, the situation remains tense: according to the budget orientation document (DOB) at the end of 2017:
– A debt of 509 million,
– A financing capacity of 23 million,
– A debt repayment capacity of 13 years.
Fortunately, markets are flush with capital and have no problem financing good clients, of which the city of Nice is certainly one. Loan interest rates are still reasonable (less than 1%) and are expected to remain so, at least in the medium term.
In addition to the well-known major projects (central kitchen, Ray project, Saint-François square, police headquarters in Saint-Roch hospital), Christian Estrosi set new goals: proximity (decentralized budget at the territorial level with a first experience of participatory democracy), security (130 additional police officers mainly for direct vigilance inside school establishments through a pilot experiment in agreement with the Ministry of National Education), and mobility (operation of line 2 and completion of line 3, for which an additional 10 million euro budget is allocated).
The oppositions have varying opinions on the document: Dominique Boy-Mottard (dvg) is waiting to see the figures support the decentralization policy, Benoît Kandel (dvd) criticizes certain points of the security policy as an expert (and ousted former official), Fabrice Decoupigny invites the mayor to pursue a genuine ecological policy (city speed at 30 km/h, adding 6/8000 m2 of gardens), Patrick Allemand (Socialist left) remains on a political level and denounces: “I expected an ambitious document with clear perspectives for the second half of the term. Allow me to express my disappointment. This is the flattest orientation document since 2008. There is no perspective, no depth.”
Two annual reports were presented: the one on sustainable development allowed Benoît Kandel to revisit the issue of the red palm weevil, a pest for palm trees, obtaining the assurance that ‘toxic’ phytosanitary products are not being used to eradicate them. Instead, natural and even organic products, he was assured.
In fact, the file is but a metropolitan variation of the Agenda 21, covering areas such as combating climate change, biodiversity, social and territorial cohesion, quality of life, responsible production and consumption, eco-responsibility.
No arguments other than the red palm weevil?
The one on gender parity energized the debate in a pure “bar-sport” style: in the general mess of declarations and counter-declarations, one could summarize it: the problem is very present, “we are trying to make progress” (says Mathy Diouf, delegated deputy), the work is complex, the delay to catch up requires time and a change of mentality. Meanwhile, everyone will continue to call themselves as they wish: madame la conseillère, madame le député. With a bit of goodwill, we should manage.
Other points:
(i) Palais Nikaia, Studios de la Victorine, Acropolis, and the Exhibition Palace, once transformed into direct management status after completing contractual and legal transactions, will be the subject of in-depth reflection to determine their best management: if the current situation of concession to a delegatee is unsatisfactory, it will not automatically improve by merely changing the management approach.
(ii) After Garibaldi square, and to a lesser extent Saint-François square, it will be the turn of Masséna square to undergo a thorough cleanup. Thanks to subsidies covering 40% of expenses, private owners can restore facades following specifications developed with the Architect of France’s Buildings. Other public interventions will be carried out for lighting and ground coverings.
(iii) To address associations’ difficulties in financing safety costs for public events they organize, a fund of 300,000 euros has been approved.
(iv) The amount of the fund for elected officials’ compensation was voted: the total package is known, slightly over 1 million, but the individual distribution is “top secret.” Dominique Boy-Mottard, who showed curiosity, was rebuffed by Mr. Treasurer. Why this secrecy? Aren’t there scales provided by law? We are in 2017…8?
