Thursday, October 25, 2012

Municipal Spending-Ratepayers Petition-Ignoring the Numbers


Well a whole smorgasbord of comments I am hearing this week in the Crowsnest Pass on my blog, around town regarding the ongoing issues in our community. First of all how many people were impressed with the Municipal advertising, I was flabbergasted,  the costs between both papers and the radio I suspect they were in the range of $8-10,000 of our taxpayers money spent on this blitz of information. I was surprised the initial reaction I have gotten from the people that I have spoken to was one of either, did not read it and do not care what it said, or couldn’t understand it.  
What amazed me more than the fact that we had $10,000 of spare money available was the response time of the municipality?
The ratepayer’s flyer hit the paper on Tuesday; I believe the papers go to press by the weekend. So in three days that package was put together approved by Council, (my impression was that it came from council and administration so I’m sure all of that team had their input and at least a majority supported this document).
That timing is incredible when you look at the context of other requests for information personally I requested information on the amount of dollars spent on Consultants it took me three months to get that information. The ratepayers requested a lot of the information that was released this week back on August 2, did not receive it until October 9. The one the public is waiting for the Rum Runner Days financial report, the event took place on the weekend of July 19, now everybody understands that it takes a few weeks for the bills to roll in and sort everything out. So I do not think anybody would have been bothered having to wait until the end of August. But folks it’s now not being released until Nov 6, and what’s made it look even worse is, its been on the Council agenda three times and three times its been deferred. Everybody understands the sensitivity of this issue so why would you do that?

The Petition last night it was announced at the Ratepayers meeting that they have close to 2100 signatures on the petition, with 30 plus people out in the community still signing names. It is not unrealistic to think that the final number could be in the range of 2500. Now keep in mind tonight Oct 25 will be two weeks since the petition started, we have a population of 5565 (2011 census) of which 855 are under the age of 18. So that means out of a potential 4710 voters 45% have signed a petition in “two weeks”, municipal, provincial even federal, elections are lucky if they get that kind of turnout after a two-month election campaign, with polling stations in place.
The message here should be not “that people are getting led down the garden path with mis-information” that argument could be made about every candidate that has run in every election campaign in the history of politics. The message that should be coming out of this process unless you have totally lost touch with the public is that something is seriously wrong here, unless of course the leadership here just chooses to totally ignore the numbers.
Yes, we all understand that the public voted for change in 2010, and change does need to and will happen. Look at what as transpired over the last little while, not just the petition, volunteers do we have any left, in yesterday’s paper there was at least eight boards listed that are short of members despite being advertised for months. The issue with the Firemen is there one person out there that felt that was handled well. The swimming pool society, the Bellevue Library.  Obviously, the public is not buying into what has been happening in our community.
    

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

So by now council knows that things are not looking to good for them. How do they get out of the mess they have got themselves into? How about by reinstating the fire cheif until a full independant inquiry can be done.Reinstate all fireman.Put a freeze on any new spending.Have a monthly meeting with the ratepayers regarding any major decisions.
Are the ideas unreasonable. I do not think so, if they just remember that they represent the people.

Anonymous said...

Have a monthly meeting with the ratepayers regarding any major decisions. Huh. This is a whole municipality here. And they do have town meetings quite often. The ratepayers do not represent me, the council does as they were elected for, good or bad.

Anonymous said...

Ironic that this is supposed to be an example of transparency and communication, but the decision to publish this (and pay for it) was not discussed or voted on at an open Council meeting.

Next time anyone sees a Councillor, ask him how much time they spent deciding to spend an extra $3000 for colour printing instead of B&W.

Anonymous said...

Here is a different point of view.
I refused to sign the petition. Not because I think these guys are doing a good job, personally I think they are doing a horrible job.
I have been asked by three people now and refused all three.
Why, Because I think it looks good on some of these people that are screaming now. Two years ago I remember sitting in the Greenhill listening to one of these guys brag about building an Indoor Pool (BS). I listened to another candidate yap off about taxes here being way to high and discouraging business and residents from moving here who now supports more and more taxes. (BS)
Remember the promises affordable housing, improved transportation system. It was all BS then and its BS now this town has no money, no industry, no tax base. I argued with people almost to the point of coming to blows. Well you not what Crowsnest Pass you wanted change you voted for change and now you got change.
No I'm not signing a petition live with what you got for another twelve months.Hopefully those people that were the one's screaming throw out the previous council, who now are the same ones screaming throw out this council have learnt a lesson.

Mark

Anonymous said...

are the ratepayers the next council in waiting?

Anonymous said...

I voted for our Mayor because I thought he brought some credibility and experience to the table. After two years, it is clear to me I was wrong on both counts. This is not a personal attack on the man, I don't know him and my opinion is based only by reading his Mayor's corner and watching him at council and at the Town Hall meetings. Crowsnest Pass is not a school board in need of turn-around. We are a community with rich history and a great future. Our future cannot be artificially manufactured in three short years. And it especially cannot be manufactured based on some fancy consulting reports. Crowsnest Pass is not resistant to change - Crowsnest Pass is resistant to foolishness.

Anonymous said...

Yes, agree Mark. But I do not understand about this "no tax base business". I don't think it has changed much in like 30 years. It really hasn't changed much.

Anonymous said...

People keep in mind that 95% of these petitions never get enough signatures then fail.
That in its self should be saying something.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:22 So if council raised your taxes by 1000% you would be ok with it, good or bad.Or if they sold the Mayor some land for 20.00$ you would be ok with it, good or bad. The people have lost faith in council, therefore you need a watchdog like the ratepayers.

Anonymous said...

Dean, So the release of the RRD Report is once again scheduled for Nov. 6. Can I picture you holding your breath right now? Isn't more study needed?

Anonymous said...

Crowsnest Pass is a great place to live full of good people. Somehow our council decided to get outside help to bring about change instead of working with resources at hand. Without the community buy-in, this big effort was bound hit the rocks. Buying full page ads will not change this.

Anonymous said...

Can't help but to think that this upcomming RRD report will truly mark this council's vision as to governence and their future legacy.

Anonymous said...

All I can say is this negative online spew reflects very poorly on our community. I have had several people from outside our community ask me "What the heck is going on in the CNP" I am embarrassed. Neither side at this point is without blame. Yet we continue to spew in all forms of media. Why would anyone want to come to this community? I know many people and businesses that have been affected negatively and are holding of, and perhaps relocating. I'm even thinking of putting my house up for sale. I am oh so done with this negativity.

Signed: Disappointed with the CNP & Living there.

Anonymous said...

I also voted for change.

This was promised to mean transparency, accountability, communication, controlled spending, no tax increases and doing things according to legal processes, policies and procedures.

Anonymous said...

Yes, there were a few self-serving people that really went overboard. The town can't even have a facebook side without all the usual negative people coming out. But it will blow over. Every community has issues, they just are not as excited as we seem to be to tell the whole world. People sometimes put themselves first, not the community. Life will go on. I think some of the Ratepayers may have stabbed themselves in the back though. Tides could turn.

John Prince said...

Anon @6:54
Don't give up on this place. This is the greatest place in the world to be in... even with all our present problems.

As soon as people here stop acting like sheep by refusing to be influenced by Gossipers and Poisoners of the Public Mind
i.e. professional agitators (like a certain media outlet) working on behalf of special interests, we'll prove it.

"Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it."

That starts by people thinking for themselves, rather than having others treating them like sheep telling them what to think and buying into their agenda.

Remember, where all think alike, no one thinks very much. Knowing how to think empowers you far beyond those who know only what to think. When more people realize this come next election and respond accordingly, then the real change we have all been craving will finally have come to the 'beautiful' Crowsnest Pass.

JP

Anonymous said...

JP

Good comment,
I am really worried that people are not catching the real point here. It does not matter if you like the council the ratepayers which ever.
The strength of this petition plus all the noise you hear going with it.
Indicates that there is a serious problem in this community.

Like wise to you John this is a great place to live. Been here for 48 years would not live any where else despite all the BS.

Anonymous said...

The serious problem, as John mentioned, is everyone acting like sheep. We have seen what happens when people did try to give a different opinion. Not too good. But I still think elections are the way to go; everyone gets a voice. The ratepayers are not doing that. It is for a few people, grandstanding a lot.

Anonymous said...

Do you know how many people told me they voted for our Mayor for two reasons. The first being the "Last Name" second being that he was so educated. I ask those people did you know anything about the person other than that? The general response "No"

Anonymous said...

The voters need to educate themselves better and make the best decision as they can, as we do for all elections.
But no matter what, you can still get the wrong person after all.
Always the next election to fix it.

Anonymous said...

I hope next time somebody runs a campaign on "CHANGE" people ask what that means exactly.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 10:18:
Most people voted for the mayor because they didn't want the other 2 candidates to get in.

Anonymous said...

Change is very hard - inept change is much harder.

Anonymous said...

Looking at the municipal effort in both newspapers, it appears our council is in some type of a collective denial. One would hope at least some councilors are asking, what brought us to this point, if everything is going so well?

Anonymous said...

Yes, the major had a landslide victory over the other two incumbents. I guess I can see the correctness of the statement he was voted in to not let the other two in. Big time.

Anonymous said...

Anom. 11:02 am
The election of the present council, weather you view them good or bad lays squarely at the feet of the Pass Herald. During the previous term, second term councilor Dean Ward and three other councilors decided the open cheque book for CLC was a poor use of public funds. Lisa did not take kindly to their action as she had become accustom to her unaccountability and entitlement as CLC manager. She used her community influence to rally some blind followers (not Peter Rosner, for an insightful read get his Dec 10th 2008 letter to the editor on Lisa’s conduct) http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/2008/12/11/public-meeting-not-open-minded. Her enthusiastic followers went door to door working diligently signing up a petition to throw out the offending councilors. The petition was rejected by the Alberta government. Lisa is not one to take defeat so she used the Pass Herald to “Poison the Public Mind” (phrase borrowed from John Price) toward the four councilors. I have to admit it was surprising to seeing how effective a weekly newspaper spewing negativity toward the four councilors was. They were soundly defeated in the 2010 election. The present council mistakenly thinks their election success is a mandate to do what ever they want with out public debate. Last election we accepted the weekly newspaper reporting as truthful and gave our minds over to Lisa in the polling booth. We did not vote for this council we voted against the previous one based on Lisa’s weekly negative thoughts.
She misused the Pass Harold to orchestrate HER CHANGE but she does not appear to be happy with the fruit of HER scheming.

peter rosner said...

I remember that evening very well and have never forgotten the people who were in attendance. Grown "MEN" hiding under Lisas skirt. Now they are known as the ratepayers. When i attended the October 11/2012 ratepayers meeting it was like de ja vu Same people different agenda this time around. I have mixed feelings about this group for they are basically good people, they just dont want to stick their neck out and get on council. However they want to tell council how to run things. This time around is different though this council has even gotten under my skin with their arrogance towards the public. Their decietful lies and underhanded manner in which they handled the fire departments and other volunteer boards. They really take us for a bunch of dummies. I guess we really had a prelude to what this council was going to be like when they tried to uproot those residents from the trailer park along the river in Blairmore. What a heartless cowardly way of handling those residents. I know this group of ratepayers has some members who are taking advantage of the hostility towards this council and may in fact run in the next election. But what are they really offering they are just getting mileage out of this.

Anonymous said...

I really agree with Peter on this one. Ratepayers is just giving people a platform.

Anonymous said...

At the very minimum, the petition will dispel this crazy notion that there is a " silent majority " supporting our council. They probably think that they just need to "stay the course," and one day the rest of us will be grateful for all they have done. At this time we just can't appreciate what needs to be done because our minds are poisoned by rumors and "untruths." We did vote them in, so when all is said and done we can't blame them for everything. However, in the meantime we can't just sit here like a bunch of " students" who just need to be educated. This is why signing this petition is so important for everyone who values small community volunteerism and a small community way life. There are a lot of people, who are now gone, who form the foundations on which our community stands. There is no need to mess with these foundations and pick a fight with every group, board or association. A small comment can't afford, nor should have a need, to run everything out of the municipal office.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:17 100% correct
The question now is , Have the voters learned who they can trust as most would not do there own research.One of the reasons that Prince got so few votes last election can also be dropped onto Lisas lap.I am ready to give this guy his shot, he does seem very passionate about the CNP.Ward will also get my vote.

Anonymous said...

Anom 3:17 you sure gave me something to think about. Looking back I have to say I was caught up in all the negative press toward the “Four Horsemen” (of the Apocalypse) and the chaos they were bringing to our community with their divisive 4-3 votes in council. In hindsight it now looks like there was freedom of thought, debate and disagreement and in the end it was democracy at work. I would love to see some freedom of thought and debate with this council. If we ever see a 4-3 vote from this council it would be a welcome change. Having said that I know it is very hard for a council to sort through all the miss information put out by some very skill bullies (some in the community and some in administration) who are self serving.
James

Anonymous said...

The petition is a good thing - no matter where anyone stands in this debate, because it is very obvious there is very little transparent debate in council. If they have any meaningful debates, these must be behind the closed doors. They promised transparency before the election and then apparently decided that debates in council would somehow detract from the “serious policy work” that had to be done in order to bring us into the 21St Century.

Anonymous said...

John said the Holiday Inn is confirmed.
Kudos to Council. I would think this is one of the most significant things to happen in the Pass.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 2:30, We should also give Kudos to the previous council, and especially the four horsemen who have taken so much heat at the time, in order for this to happen today. This is why our present council should not view everything that came before them as being wrong. They are putting too much effort fixing everything, even things which should not be fixed. But we should give them credit when it is due as well. So, not everything is wrong today - just as much as not everything was wrong before.

Anonymous said...

A lot of this discussion has been about politics and personalities and whether some decisions or actions are good or bad.

I think we should be a bit more concerned with how things are done - those boring legalities and procedures.

For example, the proper legal way to do the new, improved RRD2012 (after the trashing of TiTV) would have been for a Councillor to move to invest $100,000 with the hope of getting back half of it. The prospect of voting for or against this motion might have activated a few brain cells in some Councillors.

But, as it went, there was no vote to authorize the spending or anything else. Councillors sleep-walked through it. So when/if the RRD report is produced they must either retroactively authorize the spending or toss whoever wrote the cheques "under the bus". (I don't think they can get away with $100,000 of "creative accounting").

BTW, I ran across this this Edmonton informational document:
Councillors’ Legal Duties and Penalties (page 3 of PDF)

"A Councillor may be disqualified from holding office if he or she:
...
11. Becomes civilly liable to the municipality for spending money which is not in a City budget unless it is an emergency or legally required to be paid."


This summarizes these bits of the MGA:

Reasons for disqualification
174(1) A councillor is disqualified from council if
...
(k) the councillor is liable to the municipality under section 249.

Civil liability of councillors
249(1) A councillor who
(a) makes an expenditure that is not authorized under section 248,
...
is liable to the municipality for the expenditure or amount spent.

Expenditure of money
248(1) A municipality may only make an expenditure that is
(a) included in an operating budget, interim operating budget or capital budget or otherwise authorized by the council,
(b) for an emergency, or
(c) legally required to be paid.

Resignation on disqualification
175(1) A councillor that is disqualified must resign immediately.