You can read the full article on the Crowsnest Pass Promoter site at the following address:
http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/2013/03/15/municipal-inspection-begins
There is an address available for anybody that wishes to either be interviewed by, or willing to provide documentation or information you can do so by contacting Russell Farmer & Associates Consulting Ltd at
inspection@rfconsulting.ca
8 comments:
I guess at the end of the investigation process we will know how close this council has stuck to the 2009 strategic plan. These people doing the investigation should know first hand what the recomendations were. It should be very interesting too see what their investigation reveals as long as they are totally neutral and give an unbiased report. The final report defenitely will influence the next election. process.
What 2009 strategic plan Decoux's came out in 2011?
This investigation will find no major wrongdoings and should have little bearing on the October election, assuming it will even come out before the election.
It appears also, at least to this writer, our council did nothing wrong other than being totally deaf to the wishes the community.
It continues to appear; they have decided on a plan and then went shopping for consultants to find support for the plan. When the first Fire Consultant came up with an idea which did not suit whoever controlled the agenda at that monument, (two or three people, who knows?) – It appears again, that they got rid of that consultant and found another consultant who delivered what was supposedly needed. Keep in mind these are all appearances and the Mayor is big on claims of TRUTH in his corner talks.
Was the first plan brought to council for proper review and was dismissed, or was it not brought to council? This is the question the person conducting the review should be able to ascertain very quickly. Aside from everything - one continues to believe our councillors are honorable men.
No claims to truth are made here, but this is how the whole thing appears. Other than a letter sent to one of the local papers by one of our councillors, they have not rolled out FACTS which would support their heavy handed behaviour.
To stress to our politicians again, this is how at least the changes appeared to some of us voters. And spare us “change is hard argument” - save it for the Donkey.
How many people signed the petition? How many petitions are successful in starting a review in Alberta? Should one ignore so many voters and continue as if nothing has happened? Is this good political behaviour? Is someone’s head stuck in the sand?
The review is needed because an experienced person is needed to talk to our councillors, and remind them they are not in a classroom.
There's a dozen inspection reports listed here:
http://www.municipalaffairs.alberta.ca/1526.cfm
Daysland was by Russell Farmer.
Pretty extensive reports. Probably a lot of money involved also. The ratepayers association are giving consultants more money, willingly.
Anon 5:54
Majority wins!
Anon 3:35 i found your comment quite interesting i agree for those that already have their mind made up about this council the review will not change a thing. However there is always a group of undecided voters and the so called silent majority that can be "easily" influenced. Just as those that will sign petitions without thought or to understand what the petition is actually for.
Just got this acknowledgement to my submission to inspection@rfconsulting.ca:
"thank you for all of the information and your concerns.
If i have further questions would you be open to meeting with me either in person or over the phone?
Thank you,
Chris Hutchinson
Principal
Russell Farmer and Associates Consulting Ltd."
Post a Comment