The Field Facility Is A No Go

The treatment facility for   a per cent  of !% percent of the snow that falls on Aurora's roads this winter will not be treated by a facility that was to cost  $800.000.

$163,000 already spent on a design last year is a write off.

The item was once again the subject of vigorous discussion at a budget meeting last night.

It was not approved.

At one point  a voice was  raised  and a hand hit the table... forcefully

I do not  apologise. I really get upset when I see  taxes in millions piled on  people's  backs for no good  reason I can fathom.

I know some  people who don't see taxes as a hardship. Not surprisingly, many of them are on the public payroll.

Some of them,the 1% earning the mostmoney in Canada.

I heard  that on television.

I myself don't see taxes as a hardship so long as the community  receives a full return.

Last night we  talked about spending $14,3 million on  an architect designed,combined works and parks building on a different site estimated at $5 million.

The architect made a presentation. It was revealing

Current space  is  poorly  organised.  Space is wasted. Washrooms, showers and change rooms are inadequate.

Storage for road salt required based on per capita populations is inadequate.

Vehicle bays are used for storage. A board room is used as a lunch room.

Contractors  store  equipment on town property . Probably use the facilities as well.

Stored materials are not properly separated  and  get mixed up as a result.

We saw pictures.

There's a safety issue. Site lines are not clear for trucks coming and going. Poorly planned access is the problem 

The works building is old.  It's falling apart. No details were provided. 

The site is not big enough for two operations but too big for one.

Heritage salvage is stored  elsewhere.

Ifa site isnpurchased at  the  estimated $5 million  elsewhere, operations can continue on the current site while the  architect-designed building is being  constructed. 

We turned down an opportunity to buy an abutting site to add to the ours in  the council term before last.

Thirty-five years ago, the current pre-fabricated building was purchased and assembled on the site.

The new plan was not rubber-stamped last night.

Council Gallo expressed the thought that council should have an opportunity to  discuss how departments operate and consider efficiencies.

I thought that was a very polite way of saying... WTF

According to the report,  there is ample room for such a discussion. I am always intrigued when informed  of wasted space,disorganisation and other inefficiences and the only solution  is to spend $14.3million dollars on a new building o a site

Part of the advantage of contracting work out is that it saves space, employees and equipment.

Last night's debate  produced a spark from the other side of the table.  Opposing the idea of council  learning   how department's operate came the argument

" If you want to run the town departments"

I'm not sure if it came from Councillor Thompson, I don't think so. Or Councillor Pirri.  I know it wasn't Councillor Humphreys or Gaertner.

It was a reckless remark. It won't be forgotten.

Nor should it.

Politics is the only place one can engage in all-out battle without worrying too much about whose feelings are being hurt.

We are not fighting for ourselves but for the people who sent us.

I know little about Councillor Gallo except  occasionally seeing photos of his two beautiful children.

I believe he manages a property maintenance company.

 I don't know if the company manages company- owned  properties.

I do know the property maintenance business is  brutally  competitive.

A company can  fail  instantly by  the  loss of a contract.

Efficiency in such a business is key to survivaI

It's not the same in public business.There's always the taxpayers pocket.

I think council took a few steps forward last night.

Towards more full and lively exchange in future debates.

Much like the Aurora tradition.