Please explain how/why development charges would be applied to a renovated Town-owned building.
Posted by Anonymous to Our Town and Its Business at 20 April 2016 at 11:10
The Culture Board is privately incorporated. Unlike the Library Board, it has the right to conduct affairs behind closed doors. Financial management is the business of the board. Secrets are theirs to keep.
The facility for the program is a major feature of the operation.
Similar to St Andrew's College, to build or gut and renovate a building requires permission from the town No building permit is issued by the town without a development charge being paid.
Even an expanding retail operation like Canadian Tire that creates employment and produces revenue for the municipality, pays Cash-in-lieu.
If Church Street School had been sold to the board, or even title transferred for a nominal fee , prior to financial commitment to town heritage, liability for Development charge would have been incurred.
To realise equity in cost- sharing between municipalities and the Province, assets must be declared
to be rationalized.
Landlord status is frowned upon by the Province. It fudges the figures. Municipal income is derived from taxation a responsibility shared. with the Province.
Municipalities are expected to divest themselves of property not required for municipal purposes and realise the asset.
To ensure proper value is received from a sale, to follow the letter of the law, property must be offered for public sale.
Before the sale is closed , a Bylaw must be processed to declare the property redundant to municipal purpose.
A contract for purchase of services is a messy and artificial arrangement. Contrived for the convenience of a politician, namely the town's Mayor, to accommodate the hopes and dreams of a private citizen by handing over a public facility,rent and maintenance free, with hundreds of thousands of dollars to play with.
Nothing high-minded or noble, It was and it continues to be purely political.
The same lack of principle was involved in giving away the Hydro property which was needed and being used for municipal purposes. And would have saved the best part of $26 million dollars for
re-location and construction of a joint works and parks facility.
The same absence compelled relief to St Andrew's College from payment of a Development charge.
It happened because normal tension between the political and administrative body was not in place.
Staff , who would have given Council professional advice were fired or nudged out and replaced by those who understood their jobs depended on providing politically acceptable recommendations.
It's not corruption per se.
It's not upstanding professional performance either.
It's a shameful, degrading, ongoing and horrendously expensive game of trivial pursuit.