A Piss Poor Agreement

At times it seems I am losing whatever basic skills I have acquired. This post is a follow- on to the previous post. The post below filled the window and I couldn't move down  further with  the rest of what I had to say.

Council directed the solicitor a few weeks ago to review the Culture Centre Agreement, its  pros and cons, and report back on how it serves the community's  interest.

The Mayor had a bit of a problem with that. Said he was aware of  the solicitor's heavy workload.

The solicitor said he understood the request  and  would be able to report in a month.

It happened in a public meeting so I am not telling tales out of school.

We haven't heard yet

I think it's a piss poor agreement.   Subject to all kinds of interpretation. It should be an  embarrassment to all.

The Historical Society's former  curator informed me, the reason given for no space provided for a museum was because a museum doesn't bring in any revenue.

We regularly see events such as sing-alongs promoted  admission free. Held on week-day afternoons, they  were previously entertainment for the seniors in their own facility, designed for such events.

So ...what's up with that.

Seniors pay membership to belong to the club. The greater part of the fee is paid to the town.The service to seniors is not free.

In return, the town provides a beautiful facility plus maintenance  and staff  on hand to program events.

When  events  such as sing-alongs are  held, the group providing the entertainment are compensated. Naturally.  Seniors pay an admission fee to cover the cost. Seniors have an executive who manage the business affairs of the club.

At the Church Street School, the entertainment is free while costs are absorbed.

I don't know if that's why  events,once held at the seniors' centre, are now held at the Church Street School.

Obviously, if  sing-alongs were not being held at the  school, nothing else would be at the time. Equally obvious, if  they are not being held at the Seniors centre ,that facility is not being used for the purpose intended.  And,  if the expense of a sing-along is not met by revenue from admissions, it's met by funds provided by the town from tax revenues.

How does that represent sound financial management of  town affairs?

I don't need a solicitor to advise  the community's interest is not  served  by maintaining an  agreement for  a further  three years with an expenditure of  one and a half  million dollars funded  by the town's hard-pressed residential and business  taxpayers with no accountability whatsoever.

I will move the item be removed from the town's budget. I will not vote  to continue funnelling  more than half a million dollars of tax revenues a year  and free space  to an organisation with no responsibility or accountability to  the taxpayer.

Piss poor agreement or not.