Are you suggesting that staff were instructed to purposely produce budgets/estimates that were far in excess of what would be needed to create the illusion of competency, with the attendant positive "glow" shining on current council in an election year?
June 1, 2010 10:39 AM
I would not presume to suggest any rational for including an estimate for work not intended to be done.
But let me make this plain.
Report No. IES 10-018 was approved in the Minutes of the May 11th Meeting by Council . Ownership was transferred to Council on that date.
No explanation for the questionable estimates was required by Council. None was provided.
Accountability now rests with the elected body.
The Public Record stands.
As does the Report on the 14% increase on water rates. I had questions on that as well which were not answered to my satisfaction as an Elected Member of Council.
At the last meeting of the Joint Fire Committee a Quarterly Finance Report was submitted.
A line item for water was present.
I was informed frankly and freely by the Fire Chief, while a tanker truck may be filled at the fire hall from a metered source and charged to the department, if the tanker needs to be re-filled or topped up while away from the fire hall, it will be filled from a hydrant. It doesn't make sense to drive it back to the station empty.
Fire hydrants are not metered. That water is classified as "water loss" and is factored into water rates charged to consumers.
Water used in town parks is not metered. That includes the Splash Pad in the Mosely Park and outdoor ice surfaces in various other parks in winter. And numerous other uses.
If water taken from a non-metered source for the fire department is classified as "water loss" it follows that water taken from non- metered sources in other departments is also classified as "water loss".
In the absence of straightforward answers to specific questions about water loss, I do presume to conclude that water used for tax supported services is being charged to consumers in the calculation of water rates and thereby paid by us, as if for water consumed on our premises
I object to that.
In the same way, estimates unsupported by work to be done became the responsibility of Council by adoption of the report, the calculation of water rates to be charged to consumers are also the responsibility of the elected body.
Staff are accountable to the elected body. The elected body is responsible to the people who gave them their trust.
Since there are nine of us at the table, what chance not one will ask the relevant questions and failing to receive answers, will arrive at a logical conclusion.
What chance dodgy devices will remain secret?
What "glow" could possibly emanate from such practice.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment