Monday, 7 January 2013

Call It A Cudgel Or A Bludgeon

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Termination And Other Terms":

Nah, not buyin' it. If it was by Morris for Morrisites (as you contend) there wouldn't be a termination clause
.
***********
A termination clause is a significant club to hold over the head of a person or an organisation. 
There isn't one in the  hydro building lease to the National Defence Department. You know , the one that's  imperative to national security. Top secret an'all
I heard the building was offered because the Feds were contemplating closure of the armories
It would have meant loss of  the traditional  association with the Queen's York Rangers.
So we turfed the parks department out to make room for the Rangers. 
Now we have to build a multi- million dollar  joint facility for the parks and works department. 
The Department of National Defence can  get dispose  of the big expensive to operate, impossible to heat , drill shed at the corner of Mosely Park..
When  the lease expires for the Hydro building, if it's not renewed,  the Town . not the Department of National Defense,  will  be responsible for the end of  historical association with the Rangers.
Oh Happy Thought. 
The rent from the hydro building has been going into general revenues. 
The building is part of the Hydro asset. The rent should have been assigned to the Hydro Reserve fund. It's where it belongs. 
Why do I have to think of everything. 
This year, we are contemplating weaning ourselves from Hydro 
interest revenue of $100,000. annually.
It means we lose that amount. As well as increased costs, we will have that much less revenue. Another  cause for tax increase.
We are back at that again to-night. 
I am not content.  .      

2 comments:

  1. Is it too late to assign that money into the account in which it belongs? From the last audit we are aware that there have been human errors in dealing with the town's assets. I would think that Council could simply direct the money to the proper place? Can't see anyone objecting, not even the usual nay-sayers. It is merely a matter of correcting a mistake. No?

    ReplyDelete
  2. They sure had no problem terminating offending staff or the integrity advisor. The refrain was " There are lots of others out there. "

    ReplyDelete

If you've got a comment, this is the place to leave it for me. Please feel free to leave your name, or even just an email address if you'd like a response. You can also email me directly.