Not trying to confuse anybody but there is a G+P meeting on January 25, 2011.
First of it struck me as strange that at the meeting of January 18, following a one hour debate on the budget. With a lot of questions asked by council, and administration indicating that they would bring those responses forth at the meeting of Jan 25 that they wouldn’t just add the budget to the G+P agenda.
After all, they left Jan 18 still sitting at 5.3% (which means in simple terms an extra $365,000 a year coming out of the taxpayers pockets).
In my mind I felt Administration would come back on the 25th with clarification to the councilors concerns, pull all the give me’s out of the budget. (Item’s that the admin team would like to have, but understand that to keep what they really want, they will have to sacrifice during the final strokes of the budget process to make the politicians look good).
Then I got to thinking maybe the “die as already been cast”, Councilor Saje will not be at the meeting of Feb 1st, if the budget was on the G+P meeting agenda then no motions could be past.
Therefore, what happens Jan 25, in my humble opinion?
Administration brings forth $200-250,000 in “give me’s” carpet in the office; reduce two casuals, float, storage shed for the Hillcrest Fire Department etc, etc. Council digs in there heals a little bit understanding that there will be a negative public reaction to all the new jobs being created, so a couple of them get chopped, in addition the evil water meters go back for further study.
Some councilors will suggest that a few dollars need to be put aside for new initiatives (marketing the community, looking at new facilities) the argument will be made that more time is needed, to review the municipalities services and facilities, wait for the recommendations of the economic task force .
Therefore, council in conjunction with administration will be more than willing to look at those issues next budget.
Then the majority supports a 1-2% budget with much bigger and better things to come next year.
I have been asked how does the municipality find the money to pay for all these new positions, keep in mind that last year council at that time did not allow the new positions which saved approximately $250-300,000.
The previous two councils had taken a position that each year they would put $250,000 aside to replace the aging equipment fleet; the present budget proposes to take on debt of over $500,000 to finance equipment. Where did the $250,000 go? Look at the new positions.
Anyway I may be wrong and if I am that’s Ok, I maybe off on my timing. But I look forward very much to seeing who takes what positions.
And much more importantly who proposes real “change”.
Bringing you information, opinions and views on the political scene in the Crowsnest Pass since 2008
Showing posts with label Clarification. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clarification. Show all posts
Monday, January 24, 2011
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Thunder in the Valley Clarification
Taken a bunch of heat in the last few days about my post May 6 2010 "Thunder in the Valley"
So today I am going to clarify things so a few narrow minded people do not take the opportunity to make political hay out of my comments.
Yes I made a mistake on the title it should have been Rum Runner Days & Thunder in the Valley. I did not intend to focus all of the attention on just Thunder in the Valley.
Second the reason for the post, often I receive requests on where "your" tax dollars are spent, when I am asked I attempt to supply that information, I was asked in person via email and phone what the taxpayers spent on this weekend, I posted that information.
For example I was asked last week how much we spent on snow clearing this year versus last, why would I not supply that information?
Do I has a councilor have the right to say I'm not going to tell you?
Third I have been accused of attacking groups that put this event on, not true read the post who do I attack in my post? Look at the words " Great weekend that draws lots of people in to the Valley" which of those words are negative?
"and is a boon for most of our businesses" which of those words are negative? quite the contrary I think they speak very positively about the whole weekend.
Now do I have concerns about this weekend? of course when you have 30,000 people here if one percent of them are idiots that's 300 people, (could do a lot of damage in a small town). yes I see that side of it, I work that weekend as a jail guard at the local RCMP establishment and I see what those people have to contend with.
As far as the comments to my post, I post almost all of the comments that I receive go back and read some of the Crowsnest Centre stuff on this Blog some of the comments I received they were not all favourable to myself. The only comments I have refused to post since I started this blog were a couple of which I believed to be libel, and a couple of comments that made fun of a local persons medical condition.
Anyway back to the point of this "clarification" the original post was presented as an answer to questions I was asked by taxpayers. And under no circumstances was it an attack on any individual or group(s), and if somebody took it that way I apologise.
The idiots put aside this weekend brings a lot of good, business, and publicity to this town.
So today I am going to clarify things so a few narrow minded people do not take the opportunity to make political hay out of my comments.
Yes I made a mistake on the title it should have been Rum Runner Days & Thunder in the Valley. I did not intend to focus all of the attention on just Thunder in the Valley.
Second the reason for the post, often I receive requests on where "your" tax dollars are spent, when I am asked I attempt to supply that information, I was asked in person via email and phone what the taxpayers spent on this weekend, I posted that information.
For example I was asked last week how much we spent on snow clearing this year versus last, why would I not supply that information?
Do I has a councilor have the right to say I'm not going to tell you?
Third I have been accused of attacking groups that put this event on, not true read the post who do I attack in my post? Look at the words " Great weekend that draws lots of people in to the Valley" which of those words are negative?
"and is a boon for most of our businesses" which of those words are negative? quite the contrary I think they speak very positively about the whole weekend.
Now do I have concerns about this weekend? of course when you have 30,000 people here if one percent of them are idiots that's 300 people, (could do a lot of damage in a small town). yes I see that side of it, I work that weekend as a jail guard at the local RCMP establishment and I see what those people have to contend with.
As far as the comments to my post, I post almost all of the comments that I receive go back and read some of the Crowsnest Centre stuff on this Blog some of the comments I received they were not all favourable to myself. The only comments I have refused to post since I started this blog were a couple of which I believed to be libel, and a couple of comments that made fun of a local persons medical condition.
Anyway back to the point of this "clarification" the original post was presented as an answer to questions I was asked by taxpayers. And under no circumstances was it an attack on any individual or group(s), and if somebody took it that way I apologise.
The idiots put aside this weekend brings a lot of good, business, and publicity to this town.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)