You certainly have more information at your diposal than the average citizen. However, your interpretation may not be entirely without bias. Without an organization chart and specific details, I cannot agree that the person seconded to shovel snow is/was a crucial piece to the water distribution organization of this town.
Having said that, to speculate that Aurora has water quality issues because a Works Department employee has been assigned to snow shovelling is just wrong and I will repeat, fear-mongering in order to get a response.
The issues that contributed to the problems in Walkerton were negligence on top of poor farm drainage. Of course, left leaning people in the province blamed it on Mike Harris, but that is getting old.
I am in complete agreement that the way this "service" has been handled is less than "kosher". My beef with your original comment was to take offence that you tried to breed fear that water quality is being compromised.
Do you have any proof that within the last month or so that windrows have been cleared, that water quality has declined?
You are quite correct to raise the issue of using human resources for some thing that they are not supposed to do, but to equate it to Walkerton is grandstanding.
Fuimus
I did not speculate our water quality declined because of windrow clearing. There are two men short in a six-man crew in the water department. It's my contention, if six men on shifts are needed to carry out a particular function, that is the number you should have. To be doing it with a third cut in manpower is asking for trouble.
The Director of Public Works reported in writing to council that he did not have the manpower to undertake the extra task prior to the decision to provide the service.
I do not swallow holus-bolus everything a Director might tell me. If it's a matter of common sense ,then mine is as good as his. If it's his professional advice there is insufficient manpower to handle additional responsibility, I am going to accept that without argument.
My real concern was how Council's direction was set aside. There is protocol on how an expenditure unapproved in a budget must be authorized by council. Provincial regulations dictate governance in dealing with public money. We have internal auditors and an annual audit required by law. We have everything in place to ensure your money is handled with absolute integrity.
An expenditure was made without proper authority. How did it happen? It's my job to ask. If the answer is not forthcoming, it is also my job to draw attention to the fact. It is reasonable for the public to wonder why.
Posts
1 comment:
Councilor Buck says, "My real concern was how Council's direction was set aside. There is protocol on how an expenditure unapproved in a budget must be authorized by council. Provincial regulations dictate governance in dealing with public money. We have internal auditors and an annual audit required by law. We have everything in place to ensure your money is handled with absolute integrity."
You're the council member with most experience ( I didn't say oldest), when did the audits start?
What year? Have they ever found anything?
Just asking.
Post a Comment