Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Budget Quibbles":
Evelyn. I enjoy a food fight as much as the next person. In this instance it is going to be frightfully one sided. The electioneering has begun & councillors seem determined to purchase town votes with town money. I just don't think you can stop them. It is now all about what they want instead of about what Aurora really needs.
****************
It may look like that but it's not as cut and dried as one might think.
Council is between a couple of big boulders and a slippery slope.
In 2013, all systems were a-go for an addition and renovations to the town hall.
I didn't see the need. We are approaching build-out. I think we should be looking at the possibility of less staff needing less space rather than more.
But Council did exercise their authority. They gave the green light to proceed every step of the way.
Members consult extensively and privately with staff. They fail to realize the influence they subject themselves to .... how much it tilts their judgement .
Perhaps not unreasonably ,they depend on staff advice and presume responsibility is shared
It's not.
Council alone is accountable.
It's hard to criticize when Councillors put everything they feel they ought into making sound decisions.
Nothing is that simple.
Months of staff time, consultant studies , architect services ,estimates .
$300,000 later, Council nixed the town hall renovation project.
I believe that decision was unanimous.
It passed without much notice.
Weeks later, the exercise is being repeated with a second project three times as costly.
Last Tuesday, Councillor Gallo, affirming his support for the project from the start, read from reports to indicate why he was re-thinking his position.
Councillor Pirri appeared to be expressing reluctance
Councillor Abel expressed complete confidence in expert advice received. and suggested anyone without his courage doesn't belong at the table.
Councillor Thompson spoke of need for forward planning and vision
Next Tuesday, we will discover the final vote.
Council is faced with a serious dilemma.
A site has been purchased. Staff now report "upward cost pressures" created by problems the site presents .
Original estimates of $12 million were for a buildable site.
It's hard to keep track of the figures.
The second tab was $14 million.
Following calculations for building a shelf into the ravine sufficient to support the project, estimates for the complete project became 20 million.
A paring exercise reduced that to $19 million.
Council is currently contemplating that figure.
I am no more able to depend on it than I was the first.
I now have the right to shout out with glee
J'accuse !!!!!!!!
Did I not say....but oh no...you did not listen....such foolishness.....you had to do it your way... make like big shots you are not..... spending millions of their own money, every day of their lives..... now look at the mess you've got us into Stanley!!!!
But the situation is not a joke.
The problem is ours.
We purchased that site.
Negotiated to sell existing site.
Banked on sale of other lands that didn't happen.
No funding plan is in place .
Millions have already been spent in the process. The complete tally, we know not.
How can a Council change direction without acknowledging serious and costly mis-calculation.
Which way do they turn?
According to the tone of discussion on Tuesday , the vote may be split with Mayor Dawe breaking the tie in favor of proceeding.
My own advice:
First ....be upfront and acknowledge the problem. It was well-intentioneed but it can't be swept under the rug.
Second, the whole Council is needed to engage in the resolution.
It's no time for a pissing contest between factions.
A split decision will do nothing to assure the taxpayers.
Friday, 10 January 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
And meanwhile the site of the former old Library just sits. And it was one of the first things this Council announced that would tackle. It is going to be difficult for this term to point to achievements. Still, perhaps that is better than previous groups who created mostly negatives.
I know that this will rub some the wrong way, but... why do we not look to save money and go into these sorts of projects with a partner (ie. Newmarket or Richmond Hill)? Even thought there is a budgetary bickering, the CYFS experiment has not been a failure.
The only thing that can compete with this brouhaha is a good sex scandal.
In France it is the media's practice to turn a blind eye to presidential love affairs. Actually the French media faces strict privacy laws. Former President Francois Mitterrand had a daughter with his lover that the French media knew about but never revealed, until the president himself appeared publicly with his daughter coming out of a restaurant.
The tradition of keeping private lives private has been chipped away since Nicolas Sarkozy divorced his wife Cecilia, who was having an affair, and remarried model and singer Carla Bruni.
For over 30 years, Hollande's partner was fellow Socialist politician Segolene Royal, with whom he had four children. A month after Royals' defeat in the French presidential election of 2007, the couple announced they were separating. Within months of this a French website published details of a relationship between Hollande and French journalist Valerie Trierweiler. She has since moved into the Elysee palace with Hollande when he became president and accompanies him on official travel. But she is not considered to be the country's official First Lady. Apparently this requires marriage.
The tabloid Closer published images Friday showing a bodyguard and a helmeted man it says is Hollande visiting the apartment of Julie Gayet, a moderately known French actress who appeared in a clip for his 2012 presidential campaign. This is a breaking story and the rumours will no doubt result in the usual threats to sue.
Pierre Trudeau said famously that the government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation. He certainly knew what he was talking about.
Aurora needs a pinch or two of pepper to spice up the dull politics that its citizens are forced to swallow, week after boring week after boring week.
Can we not start rumours of hanky-panky, cut and paste photos, anything to breaks the tedium of our dull councillors repeating themselves over and over while changing their opinions as they do this? And then repeating the whole exercise.
You might be able to pull Councillor Abel back from the brink - after his swinging on the tree removal, I believe that it is important to be the last person to whom he listens before a vote. That sounds cynical but this is a more costly exercise.
14:13 Your funny. But if you’re looking for some excitement…check out Newmarket council. Don’t think they have that type of pepper and spice that you’re looking for….but they definitely have fireworks.
Don’t really see that much of a dilemma. Put that property back up for sale, and take back the building from the Rangers. Now that would be the best for the Town and its residents. I guess a little “courage” might be required. You would have Councillor Abel’s vote.
There should be agreement over funding the storm clean-up. Surely that can come from the Hydro Fund without any problem.
Any of the other major items simply have not been given the public scrutiny they deserve before spending so much money. Public in-put has been sorely lacking with close votes on too many occasions.
Mayor Dawe claim to lead through consensus. I see no consensus.
I think we had enough scandal with the former council thank you very much!
14:13
Not in Aurora. It would be against the Code of Something.
@16:43
Cllr Ballard would throw a fit if you threatened ' his ' Rangers
Bundle up tomorrow, Lady E. This weird weather can be deceptive.
If I can translate Ballard's Twits right, it looks like the Banner network is losing yet another writer. Really good re-cycling there.
Post a Comment