There has been wild speculation around Allison's show.
I'm not going to publish any more about it.
Aurora Historical Society has a membership of over one hundred.
At the time they withdrew commitment to the Museum, the reason was small membership. 59
That shocked me.
Since then, I heard membership grew ..
There's a Board of 8 Directors .
And an executive committee.
Directors have regular meetings, organise events, work on the events and solicit support.
There's an annual membership meeting.
The function of the executive is not clear There may be five members
Maybe one of them can give us an outline of the structure nd how things function.
There's an employee business manager who also serves as curator of Hillary House.
Regular grant from the town is $50,000. Because of the Hillary House Sesquicentennial , this year the grant was double.
There is irony here. The house wasn't built in Aurora.
Historically speaking, a practice was to build on a lot outside the boundary to enjoy the amenity of making a living in the town and escape paying town taxes.
Obviously, there's much I do not know. .
Friday, 12 October 2012
We Are Getting There
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Jesus,
Mary and Joseph":
"We cannot even get a working agreement with one of the ones we already possess."
Care to disabuse this commenter, Cllr Buck?
*********************
Councillors have received a recommendation from the town/ board committee for a new management structure for Church Street School.
It was provided a coule of weeks ago, in order for Councillors to be thoroughly familiar with the details before our own determination on the issue. .
The committee was directed to work out a new arrangement. Authority was not given to sign a new contract.
No doubt , we will get around to it soon.
Like next Tuesday.
I'm told, it's on the agenda of the general committee meeting.
"We cannot even get a working agreement with one of the ones we already possess."
Care to disabuse this commenter, Cllr Buck?
*********************
Councillors have received a recommendation from the town/ board committee for a new management structure for Church Street School.
It was provided a coule of weeks ago, in order for Councillors to be thoroughly familiar with the details before our own determination on the issue. .
The committee was directed to work out a new arrangement. Authority was not given to sign a new contract.
No doubt , we will get around to it soon.
Like next Tuesday.
I'm told, it's on the agenda of the general committee meeting.
What's Next Aurora
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Game Is
On":
What a bunch of reactionary crap.
"Secretive Meetings"? How was it secretive? It seems everyone was invited, some chose not to attend.... that does not make it secretive.
So what Alison is no longer hosting a show. Maybe she quit - she does have a real job. Are you saying that Rogers took her off the air because of the stupid "Notice Board"? ....... ..... people, think a little.
*************
Meetings with individual Councillors in private as opposed to public makes them secret .Nobody knows what was said. What was offered. Or accepted.
It's a tactic. Not very original. And a bad idea.
A pitch is made by several people to one person.
A Councillor is one of nine. A Councils is the sum of its parts. Decisions are made by majority vote
After all sides have been heard in a public debate..
As we saw on Tuesday, two Councilllors were first up to bat to endorse the proposal without debate . They had no interest in listening to different aspects . Even less in receiving input from the public.
Strategy for meeting singly and secretly with these two was entirely successful.
Councillor Ballard is consistent in his willingness to surrender assets.. Church Street School and close to a million out of taxes annually.
The 5 acre hydro property, needed and used by parks was given away for ten years without a termination clause to Queen's York Rangers for" the kiddies' as the former Mayor described the cadets.
Parks was turfed.
Mosely Park and funding for a family enterprise to fence in on the August holiday week-end ,to make money hand over fist.and band stand too without user fees. No wonder the Councillor was a special guests . They certainly knew they could trust him to protect their interest.
Now he wants to give away the hydro asset fund to a couple of property owners, one a real estate broker, for some crazy scheme with no other purpose but to siphon funds out of the town treasury.
Councillor Gallo is in lock-step but Councillor Gaertner has yet to state her position.
We know Suzanne Reiner, President of the Historical Society, works with Susan Walmer, master organizer of skullduggerry on the opposite side of the angels.
The Historical Society was said to be promoting the project.
They were not.
My take is the Historical Society and others were used to give the scheme respectability.
Which it doesn't.
We've seen it all before.
***********
Rogers Cable had nothing to do with Allison's show.
What a bunch of reactionary crap.
"Secretive Meetings"? How was it secretive? It seems everyone was invited, some chose not to attend.... that does not make it secretive.
So what Alison is no longer hosting a show. Maybe she quit - she does have a real job. Are you saying that Rogers took her off the air because of the stupid "Notice Board"? ....... ..... people, think a little.
*************
Meetings with individual Councillors in private as opposed to public makes them secret .Nobody knows what was said. What was offered. Or accepted.
It's a tactic. Not very original. And a bad idea.
A pitch is made by several people to one person.
A Councillor is one of nine. A Councils is the sum of its parts. Decisions are made by majority vote
After all sides have been heard in a public debate..
As we saw on Tuesday, two Councilllors were first up to bat to endorse the proposal without debate . They had no interest in listening to different aspects . Even less in receiving input from the public.
Strategy for meeting singly and secretly with these two was entirely successful.
Councillor Ballard is consistent in his willingness to surrender assets.. Church Street School and close to a million out of taxes annually.
The 5 acre hydro property, needed and used by parks was given away for ten years without a termination clause to Queen's York Rangers for" the kiddies' as the former Mayor described the cadets.
Parks was turfed.
Mosely Park and funding for a family enterprise to fence in on the August holiday week-end ,to make money hand over fist.and band stand too without user fees. No wonder the Councillor was a special guests . They certainly knew they could trust him to protect their interest.
Now he wants to give away the hydro asset fund to a couple of property owners, one a real estate broker, for some crazy scheme with no other purpose but to siphon funds out of the town treasury.
Councillor Gallo is in lock-step but Councillor Gaertner has yet to state her position.
We know Suzanne Reiner, President of the Historical Society, works with Susan Walmer, master organizer of skullduggerry on the opposite side of the angels.
The Historical Society was said to be promoting the project.
They were not.
My take is the Historical Society and others were used to give the scheme respectability.
Which it doesn't.
We've seen it all before.
***********
Rogers Cable had nothing to do with Allison's show.
Thursday, 11 October 2012
The Game Is On
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Jesus,
Mary and Joseph":
Feel free to delete if this is too disrespectful.
Once certain Councillors & especially our Mayor, get a particular bee in their bonnets, there does not appear to be room for anything further.
**********
We could be jumping the gun here.
A presentation was made to Council on Tuesday .
A couple of Councillors expressed enthusiastic support. Like Pavlov's dog.
The motion approved by Council was to receive the presentation and refer .... I'm not sure where .
Several Councilors did not comment.
I'm not sure all Councillors participated in the secret, separate meetings.
Future debate will be open and fulsome.
Councillors are obliged to consider all aspects of the matter before a decision is made.
We may not presume to know what the decision will be.
Mainly because the public will have their input.
Councillors will listen and consider the merits and otherwise of the proposal.
We should not underestimate the calculated plan of the scheme's proponents.
The plan itself must stand up to scrutiny and Councillors run the gauntlet of public opinion.
The game is on.
It's not over.
Feel free to delete if this is too disrespectful.
Once certain Councillors & especially our Mayor, get a particular bee in their bonnets, there does not appear to be room for anything further.
**********
We could be jumping the gun here.
A presentation was made to Council on Tuesday .
A couple of Councillors expressed enthusiastic support. Like Pavlov's dog.
The motion approved by Council was to receive the presentation and refer .... I'm not sure where .
Several Councilors did not comment.
I'm not sure all Councillors participated in the secret, separate meetings.
Future debate will be open and fulsome.
Councillors are obliged to consider all aspects of the matter before a decision is made.
We may not presume to know what the decision will be.
Mainly because the public will have their input.
Councillors will listen and consider the merits and otherwise of the proposal.
We should not underestimate the calculated plan of the scheme's proponents.
The plan itself must stand up to scrutiny and Councillors run the gauntlet of public opinion.
The game is on.
It's not over.
Yeah,,,Right
I Dunno has left a new comment on your post "Jesus,
Mary and Joseph":
"The concept will not be promoted in this space.
Why would it?"
To attempt to provide balance to the discussion? To avoid skewing perceptions? To allow both sides to have a forum?
*****************
We are talking about a promotion scheme that has been railroaded onto the public's perception.
Separate, secret meetings with Councillors designed to maximise
manipulation .
How's that for an attempt to skew results.
And by the way, line up a list of prominent names in support of the project before the public gets to hear about a potential raid on public funds for a gamble at best.
How's that for balance.
Everything that could be has already been done to skew perceptions.
We have a way to go before balance is restored.
This space . for now, will be used to even things up a bit.
"The concept will not be promoted in this space.
Why would it?"
To attempt to provide balance to the discussion? To avoid skewing perceptions? To allow both sides to have a forum?
*****************
We are talking about a promotion scheme that has been railroaded onto the public's perception.
Separate, secret meetings with Councillors designed to maximise
manipulation .
How's that for an attempt to skew results.
And by the way, line up a list of prominent names in support of the project before the public gets to hear about a potential raid on public funds for a gamble at best.
How's that for balance.
Everything that could be has already been done to skew perceptions.
We have a way to go before balance is restored.
This space . for now, will be used to even things up a bit.
Jesus, Mary and Joseph
Eleven comments oppose the Heritage Park Concept on north Yonge Street . Three are in support..
The concept will not be promoted in this space.
Why would it?
I will keep tabs however.
The question, has been asked "why wasn't one of them honest and upfront" referring to Council.
I am one of them. I have been honest and upfront. Information was provided here months ago.
I received an invitation from Suzanne Reiner to a secret and separate meeting to hear of an opportunity for investment.
Shades of Bernie Madoff, I thought.
I refused and informed Ms Reiner such a meeting was entirely inappropriate.
Meetings proceeded anyway. Some Councillors had already met with the imaginative trio; Reiner, Albino and Sprague.
Reiner is President of the Aurora Historical Society. The fact probably lent propriety to an otherwise dodgy enterprise.
Yet the Aurora Historical Society was not front and centre in support of the project.
Of the list of named supporters, with exception of the Mayor, none are accountable to taxpayers.
Like Suzanne Reiner, Mayor Dawe was not authorised by Council to lend the support of his office to the enterprise.
In itself, that circumstance is problematic.
Can a person elected to the office of Mayor or Councillor, separate his or her activities from the constraints of public office?
From my experience, it's hard to imagine how Councillors could perceive secret, separate meetings as appropriate.
Councillor Pirri, absent on Tuesday, informed me previously he thought the idea being floated had merit but he did not support public funding.
Expressions of unqualified support heard on Tuesday came from Councillors Ballard and Gallo.
Even that baffles me.
We are speaking of prime real estate . Assessment revenue is the town's bread and butter.
Sprague's property is designated for multiple residential units.
Forfeited revenue can be calculated in millions.
Hillary House receives all municipal services. Sidewalk, street lighting, snow plowing,, water.sewers,police and fire protection parks, schools and recreation facilities.
As a federally designated heritage site, I doubt we see a thin red dime contributed to the cost of services provided.
(If I call the treasury department to confirm, my inquiry must be run past the Chief Financial Officer before I am permitted to receive an answer)
McIntyre's property, from an assessment perspective is currently vastly underutilized.
A "Heritage Park" publicly owned, all tax revenue would be forfeit.
Unused and unuseable frontage on Yonge Street, the town's main commercial throughfare, Craddock Park, St Andrew's College Machell Park and multiple other sites is substantial.In terms of revenue, they are a deficit.
How much ore can we afford to forfeit.
A municipality is a business corporation.Assessment is our base.
Why would a knowledgeable elected or appointed official endorse an idea that removes a large, key, chunk of useable Yonge Street frontage from potential earnings, without first examining the impact. .
The town already has an agreement that allows a bubble erected on public property to be used for a commercial purpose.
No assessment revenue is derived because the land is in the public domain.
Yet the town pays Regional and Education taxes on the property. Over the twenty year lease, it will have cost the municipality $2 million dollars in taxes to other levels of government.
Apparently, there's a way around it. We haven't made the effort.
There's a soccer clubhouse at the south end of town, on public land . Prime employment land. The men's soccer club pays a dollar a year in rent.
The town has forfeited a capital asset, assessment revenue, and potential for employment
In return, the soccer club competes with tax-paying, employment providing businesses, for wedding and funeral receptions and business lunches.
The Royal Canadian Legion has two building on their property.
They enjoy all municipal services. The town pays their taxes to the region and school board and forfeits our own share.
They compete with taxpaying business within the community.
Promoters of the Heritage Park provide a dazzling outline of potential commercial opportunities such as weddings and receptions.
Should local businesses be thrilled by the prospect of more non-taxpaying competition funded by public resources ?
I think not.
Hillary House has been touted for years as an asset to the town
No potential has ever been realized.
The property has swallowed up millions in financial resources and volunteer commitment.
Since 2003, when Church Street School was closed to be renovated for use as a museum, the town added to the forfeited tax revenues with a reduction in service.
$50,000 was transferred annually to the Historical Society with no obvious return whatsoever.
Nothing at all to offset the expenditure in town book-keeping.
Aurora has history and ample experience of how not to run a business.
Yet we are charged with the responsibility. .
We might better focus our efforts on doing our job fairly and efficiently, before branching out in a cockamamie scheme to compete with Disneyland.
Saints Preserve Us, have we lost our wits completely?
The concept will not be promoted in this space.
Why would it?
I will keep tabs however.
The question, has been asked "why wasn't one of them honest and upfront" referring to Council.
I am one of them. I have been honest and upfront. Information was provided here months ago.
I received an invitation from Suzanne Reiner to a secret and separate meeting to hear of an opportunity for investment.
Shades of Bernie Madoff, I thought.
I refused and informed Ms Reiner such a meeting was entirely inappropriate.
Meetings proceeded anyway. Some Councillors had already met with the imaginative trio; Reiner, Albino and Sprague.
Reiner is President of the Aurora Historical Society. The fact probably lent propriety to an otherwise dodgy enterprise.
Yet the Aurora Historical Society was not front and centre in support of the project.
Of the list of named supporters, with exception of the Mayor, none are accountable to taxpayers.
Like Suzanne Reiner, Mayor Dawe was not authorised by Council to lend the support of his office to the enterprise.
In itself, that circumstance is problematic.
Can a person elected to the office of Mayor or Councillor, separate his or her activities from the constraints of public office?
From my experience, it's hard to imagine how Councillors could perceive secret, separate meetings as appropriate.
Councillor Pirri, absent on Tuesday, informed me previously he thought the idea being floated had merit but he did not support public funding.
Expressions of unqualified support heard on Tuesday came from Councillors Ballard and Gallo.
Even that baffles me.
We are speaking of prime real estate . Assessment revenue is the town's bread and butter.
Sprague's property is designated for multiple residential units.
Forfeited revenue can be calculated in millions.
Hillary House receives all municipal services. Sidewalk, street lighting, snow plowing,, water.sewers,police and fire protection parks, schools and recreation facilities.
As a federally designated heritage site, I doubt we see a thin red dime contributed to the cost of services provided.
(If I call the treasury department to confirm, my inquiry must be run past the Chief Financial Officer before I am permitted to receive an answer)
McIntyre's property, from an assessment perspective is currently vastly underutilized.
A "Heritage Park" publicly owned, all tax revenue would be forfeit.
Unused and unuseable frontage on Yonge Street, the town's main commercial throughfare, Craddock Park, St Andrew's College Machell Park and multiple other sites is substantial.In terms of revenue, they are a deficit.
How much ore can we afford to forfeit.
A municipality is a business corporation.Assessment is our base.
Why would a knowledgeable elected or appointed official endorse an idea that removes a large, key, chunk of useable Yonge Street frontage from potential earnings, without first examining the impact. .
The town already has an agreement that allows a bubble erected on public property to be used for a commercial purpose.
No assessment revenue is derived because the land is in the public domain.
Yet the town pays Regional and Education taxes on the property. Over the twenty year lease, it will have cost the municipality $2 million dollars in taxes to other levels of government.
Apparently, there's a way around it. We haven't made the effort.
There's a soccer clubhouse at the south end of town, on public land . Prime employment land. The men's soccer club pays a dollar a year in rent.
The town has forfeited a capital asset, assessment revenue, and potential for employment
In return, the soccer club competes with tax-paying, employment providing businesses, for wedding and funeral receptions and business lunches.
The Royal Canadian Legion has two building on their property.
They enjoy all municipal services. The town pays their taxes to the region and school board and forfeits our own share.
They compete with taxpaying business within the community.
Promoters of the Heritage Park provide a dazzling outline of potential commercial opportunities such as weddings and receptions.
Should local businesses be thrilled by the prospect of more non-taxpaying competition funded by public resources ?
I think not.
Hillary House has been touted for years as an asset to the town
No potential has ever been realized.
The property has swallowed up millions in financial resources and volunteer commitment.
Since 2003, when Church Street School was closed to be renovated for use as a museum, the town added to the forfeited tax revenues with a reduction in service.
$50,000 was transferred annually to the Historical Society with no obvious return whatsoever.
Nothing at all to offset the expenditure in town book-keeping.
Aurora has history and ample experience of how not to run a business.
Yet we are charged with the responsibility. .
We might better focus our efforts on doing our job fairly and efficiently, before branching out in a cockamamie scheme to compete with Disneyland.
Saints Preserve Us, have we lost our wits completely?
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
You Are Not Small
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Last
NIght's Meeting":
Thank you, 5:48 PM. Thank you, thank you! But we are so small and tend to be quiet unless there is an election. Even then, voices are seldom raised. I was so grateful to you, but haven't a clue what I can do to help you.
**************
You are not small. Your voice can be heard. You have a computer.
Send an e-mail to the Mayor or Councillor . Tell him you do not want public assets used for this project.
While your fingers are darting over the keyboard, tell them you are not prepared to accept another tax increase either.
It's about helping yourself .
They will listen because that is their reason for being
You put them there and occasionally we all need to be reminded.
Thank you, 5:48 PM. Thank you, thank you! But we are so small and tend to be quiet unless there is an election. Even then, voices are seldom raised. I was so grateful to you, but haven't a clue what I can do to help you.
**************
You are not small. Your voice can be heard. You have a computer.
Send an e-mail to the Mayor or Councillor . Tell him you do not want public assets used for this project.
While your fingers are darting over the keyboard, tell them you are not prepared to accept another tax increase either.
It's about helping yourself .
They will listen because that is their reason for being
You put them there and occasionally we all need to be reminded.
What was said
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Last
NIght's Meeting":
I watched coverage of the council meeting last night and was dumbfounded at the conclusion of Mr. Albino's presentation to council members. Several members gushed and fawned over the wonderful, refreshing concept and plan that Mr. Albino put before them. The gushes praised the plan as an innovative approach, "thinking out of the box" and feigned innocent delight as though they had never imagined such a project.
How strange! The mayor and several other councillors had each been treated, on separate occasions, to an individual pitch about the proposal and project by Mr. Albino himself during the summer. I can attest to that. They also each lent their support to Mr. Albino before each meeting adjourned. They knew all about it and backed it long before last night's meeting. So why all the drama, pretending and acting? Why the paying lipservice to public consultation and feedback when a majority of council has already pledged support? Is that how business is done in this town? Whay wasn't one of them honest and upfront?
Mr. Albino talked about the "involvement of very important people in putting together the proposal - in fact THE most important people in Aurora"... and then he dared to ask for a handout from us, the taxpayers! How reassuring to know that "the most important people in Aurora are devising ways to spend my money when we are faced with a > 8% property tax increase!
I think not, council and Mr. Albino! Let's have you and your "very important people" cough up the money to fund your "out of the box", innovative projects.
Have you not noticed that there is a multitude of "not very important people in Aurora" who cannot afford your proposed tax increases, especially to fund such elitist projects. God knows we have been snowed enough over the infamous "culture" centre. I suggest you join the real world and represent the majority of your, ordinary, joe blow taxpayers and get your noses out of the asses of Aurora's high and mighty "most important people." Many of this town's taxpayers are hurting more than you can imagine. It's about time you listened and lent your support to THEM.
I watched coverage of the council meeting last night and was dumbfounded at the conclusion of Mr. Albino's presentation to council members. Several members gushed and fawned over the wonderful, refreshing concept and plan that Mr. Albino put before them. The gushes praised the plan as an innovative approach, "thinking out of the box" and feigned innocent delight as though they had never imagined such a project.
How strange! The mayor and several other councillors had each been treated, on separate occasions, to an individual pitch about the proposal and project by Mr. Albino himself during the summer. I can attest to that. They also each lent their support to Mr. Albino before each meeting adjourned. They knew all about it and backed it long before last night's meeting. So why all the drama, pretending and acting? Why the paying lipservice to public consultation and feedback when a majority of council has already pledged support? Is that how business is done in this town? Whay wasn't one of them honest and upfront?
Mr. Albino talked about the "involvement of very important people in putting together the proposal - in fact THE most important people in Aurora"... and then he dared to ask for a handout from us, the taxpayers! How reassuring to know that "the most important people in Aurora are devising ways to spend my money when we are faced with a > 8% property tax increase!
I think not, council and Mr. Albino! Let's have you and your "very important people" cough up the money to fund your "out of the box", innovative projects.
Have you not noticed that there is a multitude of "not very important people in Aurora" who cannot afford your proposed tax increases, especially to fund such elitist projects. God knows we have been snowed enough over the infamous "culture" centre. I suggest you join the real world and represent the majority of your, ordinary, joe blow taxpayers and get your noses out of the asses of Aurora's high and mighty "most important people." Many of this town's taxpayers are hurting more than you can imagine. It's about time you listened and lent your support to THEM.
Last NIght's Meeting
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The
Question Was About Taxes":
I couldn't watch last night's Council meeting. What did I miss?
********************
It was a mixed bag. Interesting because of it.
A resident opposed tax increases.Told about working at three jobs for sixty hours a week to meet obligations and help a child
with education expenses.No affluence claimed .
Demeanor was civil, language temperate. But no question of her purpose in being heard.
E-mails coming in are making the same argument.
A poll in The Auroran records fifty-per-cent in favour of using the hydro money to reduce taxes.
Voter dis-satisfaction with Council's budget performance is clear.
It's a good start. But not enough
Council will listen, if people direct their comments to the source.
The effort to be heard. needs to be made.
York Regional Police came to announce Special Olympics Summer Games in 2013. will be held in the Region and they are the Sponsors.
Red laces will be on sale for $5. at various venues . They hope people will wear red lacesto signify support for the athletes.
They showed a video.
I wept.
The outfit pitching a Heritage Park, created with public assets,
delegated.
John MacIntyre will sell his house to the town at a discount.
Bruce Sprague, real estate mogul. will make his property available; at a price of course.
It's seen as the perfect home for the Aurora Museum Collection.
Bruce Sprague processed a development plan for the property seven years ago. Number of residential units is either seventeen or twenty-seven.
Representing millions of revenue dollars to the town.
The property has been on sale for seven years.
Obviously the price isn't right.
The delegate spoke of wonderful commercial opportunities in a Heritage Park.
Private investment is anticipated.
I failed to share the vision. I might be excited if said private investors were falling over each other to get a piece of the action.
But no evidence of that was presented.
The request was for Council to put our hands in taxpayers' pockets and take their money.
Of course we know the Hydro fund is the targeted pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
I imagine McIntyre, Sprague and friends talking about how to get some of that for themselves.
Mr. Albino made the pitch on their behalf . He is a recent member of the Aurora Historical Society.That's all I know about him.
Aurora Tennis Club has a similar proposal before Council. A"Playhouse" to be built in Fleury Park.
The private club could play tennis in winter but to soften the pitch, they also speak of a place to hold weddings and provide a venue for Performing Arts. .
There's no law against people or organisations floating purely selfish, private interests to gain access to public funds.
We have seen it before.
But there is an expectation that elected officials will recognise such for what they are and opt instead for the interest of the community at large.
The irony of a presentation by a resident articulating hardship in meeting family obligations, while property taxes continue to skyrocket and at the same time , a group making a clear grab for public assets should not have passed unnoticed.
And yet.
Like a pair of Middle Eastern Potentates with excess oil revenues to burn, Councillor Gallo and Ballard could hardly contain their excitement.
The Mayor's name is on the list of V.I.P. supporters.
Councillor Abel moved the motion that gives the proposal status.
Off to the races we go.
To bet on a dark horse.
With public resources.
I couldn't watch last night's Council meeting. What did I miss?
********************
It was a mixed bag. Interesting because of it.
A resident opposed tax increases.Told about working at three jobs for sixty hours a week to meet obligations and help a child
with education expenses.No affluence claimed .
Demeanor was civil, language temperate. But no question of her purpose in being heard.
E-mails coming in are making the same argument.
A poll in The Auroran records fifty-per-cent in favour of using the hydro money to reduce taxes.
Voter dis-satisfaction with Council's budget performance is clear.
It's a good start. But not enough
Council will listen, if people direct their comments to the source.
The effort to be heard. needs to be made.
York Regional Police came to announce Special Olympics Summer Games in 2013. will be held in the Region and they are the Sponsors.
Red laces will be on sale for $5. at various venues . They hope people will wear red lacesto signify support for the athletes.
They showed a video.
I wept.
The outfit pitching a Heritage Park, created with public assets,
delegated.
John MacIntyre will sell his house to the town at a discount.
Bruce Sprague, real estate mogul. will make his property available; at a price of course.
It's seen as the perfect home for the Aurora Museum Collection.
Bruce Sprague processed a development plan for the property seven years ago. Number of residential units is either seventeen or twenty-seven.
Representing millions of revenue dollars to the town.
The property has been on sale for seven years.
Obviously the price isn't right.
The delegate spoke of wonderful commercial opportunities in a Heritage Park.
Private investment is anticipated.
I failed to share the vision. I might be excited if said private investors were falling over each other to get a piece of the action.
But no evidence of that was presented.
The request was for Council to put our hands in taxpayers' pockets and take their money.
Of course we know the Hydro fund is the targeted pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
I imagine McIntyre, Sprague and friends talking about how to get some of that for themselves.
Mr. Albino made the pitch on their behalf . He is a recent member of the Aurora Historical Society.That's all I know about him.
Aurora Tennis Club has a similar proposal before Council. A"Playhouse" to be built in Fleury Park.
The private club could play tennis in winter but to soften the pitch, they also speak of a place to hold weddings and provide a venue for Performing Arts. .
There's no law against people or organisations floating purely selfish, private interests to gain access to public funds.
We have seen it before.
But there is an expectation that elected officials will recognise such for what they are and opt instead for the interest of the community at large.
The irony of a presentation by a resident articulating hardship in meeting family obligations, while property taxes continue to skyrocket and at the same time , a group making a clear grab for public assets should not have passed unnoticed.
And yet.
Like a pair of Middle Eastern Potentates with excess oil revenues to burn, Councillor Gallo and Ballard could hardly contain their excitement.
The Mayor's name is on the list of V.I.P. supporters.
Councillor Abel moved the motion that gives the proposal status.
Off to the races we go.
To bet on a dark horse.
With public resources.
Tuesday, 9 October 2012
The Question Was About Taxes
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "An
Interesting Perspective":
How many developers do you know that aren't wealthy?
*************
The question asked was about how taxes on housing had increased in the last forty years.
My answer is not presented as an analytical survey.
Nor about the wealth of developers.
I know of developers who have grown from small beginnings to apparent wealth.
I know some who failed in the business .
I know one who went bankrupt and lost everything.
Another who wasn't able to hang on long enough for the big return.
I know people who think development is a gold mine.
I know people with families, who lost their jobs because of downturns in the housing industry.
I know of a planner, seconded to the region, because of no work for him in our department.
I know, in speaking of developers' profits, we are not speaking of reducing them through taxes, lot levies and fees for processing land development plans..
Cost are overheads. Only the consumer pays .
The idea municipalities and politicians are biting into developers' profits is fanciful at best.
At worst it's a sleazy unintelligent justification for money grab. .
We tell developers we must take money to save current residents from the cost of growth.
When was the last time you saw reduction or a stable rate in you property tax?
Did you not notice a 12% increases in water and sewer rates in 2010 and 11% in 2011 and again in 2012. You will be hit again again in 2013 and 2014.
When will you notice?
We take water from the ground and Lake Ontario. We don't manufacture it. It's ours for the taking.
Why does the price of water go up at that rate ?
What does it take to understand, there's something seriously wrong with the equation?
Millions are taken from developers to keep the rates down. But rates are not down.
Millions more are taken out of our pockets by the people we elected.
The Mayor says "water is the best bargain we get"
In a pig's ear, it is.
A bargain is not how I would describe it.
How many developers do you know that aren't wealthy?
*************
The question asked was about how taxes on housing had increased in the last forty years.
My answer is not presented as an analytical survey.
Nor about the wealth of developers.
I know of developers who have grown from small beginnings to apparent wealth.
I know some who failed in the business .
I know one who went bankrupt and lost everything.
Another who wasn't able to hang on long enough for the big return.
I know people who think development is a gold mine.
I know people with families, who lost their jobs because of downturns in the housing industry.
I know of a planner, seconded to the region, because of no work for him in our department.
I know, in speaking of developers' profits, we are not speaking of reducing them through taxes, lot levies and fees for processing land development plans..
Cost are overheads. Only the consumer pays .
The idea municipalities and politicians are biting into developers' profits is fanciful at best.
At worst it's a sleazy unintelligent justification for money grab. .
We tell developers we must take money to save current residents from the cost of growth.
When was the last time you saw reduction or a stable rate in you property tax?
Did you not notice a 12% increases in water and sewer rates in 2010 and 11% in 2011 and again in 2012. You will be hit again again in 2013 and 2014.
When will you notice?
We take water from the ground and Lake Ontario. We don't manufacture it. It's ours for the taking.
Why does the price of water go up at that rate ?
What does it take to understand, there's something seriously wrong with the equation?
Millions are taken from developers to keep the rates down. But rates are not down.
Millions more are taken out of our pockets by the people we elected.
The Mayor says "water is the best bargain we get"
In a pig's ear, it is.
A bargain is not how I would describe it.
An Interesting Perspective
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The
Toronto Star Said":
It would be interesting to know what percentage of a new home's selling price development charges represent and whether this percentage has been increasing over the past, let's say, 40 years.
Developers/builders are in the business to make a profit. Is this profit excessive or in line with those of the past 40 years, expressed as a percentage of a new home's selling price?
Any business investment is made on the basis of the anticipated percentage return on capital. If this percentage is less than warranted by the risk then the investment will not be made.
Politicians at the municipal level are responsible for providing and administering services to its residents. These can vary widely; there is no magical formula.
These services are provided for the lifetime of the municipality and when things such as roads, sewers and water facilities start to age and require major repair or replacement, the costs for these must be borne by the municipality, namely the taxpayers.
We have been fortunate in that our municipalities have managed to avoid the rot that has occurred in many large American cities. Most of us have seen photos or film footage of abandoned homes and factories, falling into disrepair and crumbling, a magnet for crime and criminals.
What we have to recognize is that traditional housing, single or semi-detached, is a luxury that we can no longer afford. The only way to accommodate a projected explosion in population is with relatively high-rise buildings. This will reduce future required increases in development charges and will avoid filling our communities from boarder to boarder with asphalt and concrete. We might be able to manage a park or two.
********************************
Taking the last point first. There appears to be no slowdown in housing sales, no matter how high the price.
Value of a property is what the buyer is willing to pay.
Children are being raised in institutions.
I can't tell you how profits have grown.
I have a sense of how taxes and cost of processing development plans have skyrocketed.
When lot levies started, the figure was $250. The number wasn't based on anything in particular. It was new-found money.
When Regional government was created, regulations started in earnest.
Planning departments were created.Two. One at each level.
New procedures were generated.Constraints established.
Process time grew.
Money invested in land took longer to realise return and cost more. Like ten or fifteen years and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Builders stopped buying land and bought development plans instead.
Land speculators had to make their money before a single permit was issued.
Builders are not philanthropists. They need to pay wages and have some for themselves.
Development charges kept growing.
The Federal government introduced a tax on goods and services. Everything needed to produce a house.
The Feds argued the tax had previously been hidden from the consumer because it was paid by manufacturers of bricks and lumber and plumbing and glass etc.etc.
All services associated with building and transferring a property title were newly taxed.
Lawyers, real estate services, planners,engineers,consultants, all that lot.The list is endless and has to be duplicated for O.M.B. hearings.
Application fees have to be paid and accompanied by a myriad of professional studies. All of them taxed.
Departments engaged in the process by the municipality, the Region, Conservation Authorities, and all other agencies had to get their cut application fees. They pay the freight.
Land transfer tax existed all those years ago
The Province of Ontario was first to introduce a sales tax. It produced such a wealth of revenue the government was too embarrassed to tell.
It was after they were embarrassed by the wealth of revenue generated by lotteries.
And of course in addition to the billions generated by the L,C.B.O.
Thousands of people are employed in the housing industry. All paying government taxes. .
Forty years ago, houses got built. They stood the test of time. Neighborhoods came into being and matured nicely.
Front yards were sodded. Not the back. A single sidewalk was built on a major traffic collector.
Ditches provided storm drainage.
Driveways were of chucky stones.
Trees were not planted on front lawns.
There were no boulevards, no urban tree forest.
Hydro was overhead
Three bathrooms were not required , or designer kitchens
or picture windows that had to be replaced in a couple of years
because of rot caused by condensation, tight seal and high efficiency furnaces.
Did I mention; the first lot levies were $250.
They are now close to $36,000.
A house that might have cost $14,000, is now assessed close to half a million.
Taxes hidden in the price, now become " market value"of the property, assessed accordingly and taxes are paid on taxes forever and a day.
Easy come, easy go.
No matter how much ready cash is available, no matter how it grows, politicians and bureaucrats can always find a reason, valid or otherwise, to take more.
Did I tell you Aurora politicians are often advised of our community's affluence and high level of education ?
It would be interesting to know what percentage of a new home's selling price development charges represent and whether this percentage has been increasing over the past, let's say, 40 years.
Developers/builders are in the business to make a profit. Is this profit excessive or in line with those of the past 40 years, expressed as a percentage of a new home's selling price?
Any business investment is made on the basis of the anticipated percentage return on capital. If this percentage is less than warranted by the risk then the investment will not be made.
Politicians at the municipal level are responsible for providing and administering services to its residents. These can vary widely; there is no magical formula.
These services are provided for the lifetime of the municipality and when things such as roads, sewers and water facilities start to age and require major repair or replacement, the costs for these must be borne by the municipality, namely the taxpayers.
We have been fortunate in that our municipalities have managed to avoid the rot that has occurred in many large American cities. Most of us have seen photos or film footage of abandoned homes and factories, falling into disrepair and crumbling, a magnet for crime and criminals.
What we have to recognize is that traditional housing, single or semi-detached, is a luxury that we can no longer afford. The only way to accommodate a projected explosion in population is with relatively high-rise buildings. This will reduce future required increases in development charges and will avoid filling our communities from boarder to boarder with asphalt and concrete. We might be able to manage a park or two.
********************************
Taking the last point first. There appears to be no slowdown in housing sales, no matter how high the price.
Value of a property is what the buyer is willing to pay.
Children are being raised in institutions.
I can't tell you how profits have grown.
I have a sense of how taxes and cost of processing development plans have skyrocketed.
When lot levies started, the figure was $250. The number wasn't based on anything in particular. It was new-found money.
When Regional government was created, regulations started in earnest.
Planning departments were created.Two. One at each level.
New procedures were generated.Constraints established.
Process time grew.
Money invested in land took longer to realise return and cost more. Like ten or fifteen years and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Builders stopped buying land and bought development plans instead.
Land speculators had to make their money before a single permit was issued.
Builders are not philanthropists. They need to pay wages and have some for themselves.
Development charges kept growing.
The Federal government introduced a tax on goods and services. Everything needed to produce a house.
The Feds argued the tax had previously been hidden from the consumer because it was paid by manufacturers of bricks and lumber and plumbing and glass etc.etc.
All services associated with building and transferring a property title were newly taxed.
Lawyers, real estate services, planners,engineers,consultants, all that lot.The list is endless and has to be duplicated for O.M.B. hearings.
Application fees have to be paid and accompanied by a myriad of professional studies. All of them taxed.
Departments engaged in the process by the municipality, the Region, Conservation Authorities, and all other agencies had to get their cut application fees. They pay the freight.
Land transfer tax existed all those years ago
The Province of Ontario was first to introduce a sales tax. It produced such a wealth of revenue the government was too embarrassed to tell.
It was after they were embarrassed by the wealth of revenue generated by lotteries.
And of course in addition to the billions generated by the L,C.B.O.
Thousands of people are employed in the housing industry. All paying government taxes. .
Forty years ago, houses got built. They stood the test of time. Neighborhoods came into being and matured nicely.
Front yards were sodded. Not the back. A single sidewalk was built on a major traffic collector.
Ditches provided storm drainage.
Driveways were of chucky stones.
Trees were not planted on front lawns.
There were no boulevards, no urban tree forest.
Hydro was overhead
Three bathrooms were not required , or designer kitchens
or picture windows that had to be replaced in a couple of years
because of rot caused by condensation, tight seal and high efficiency furnaces.
Did I mention; the first lot levies were $250.
They are now close to $36,000.
A house that might have cost $14,000, is now assessed close to half a million.
Taxes hidden in the price, now become " market value"of the property, assessed accordingly and taxes are paid on taxes forever and a day.
Easy come, easy go.
No matter how much ready cash is available, no matter how it grows, politicians and bureaucrats can always find a reason, valid or otherwise, to take more.
Did I tell you Aurora politicians are often advised of our community's affluence and high level of education ?
Monday, 8 October 2012
The Toronto Star Said
Peel development charge increase means homebuyers pay extra $18,000
25 Comments
If you’re thinking of buying a newly built home in the Region of
Peel, you might want to schedule another meeting with your banker,
thanks to a 99 per cent increase in development charges just passed by
regional council.
At a recent meeting councillors from Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon voted to increase development charges for each single-family residential unit from the old rate of $17,830 to $35,532, effective Oct. 4. The increase will not apply to homes that have already received permits for construction or are well into the planning stage.
While the move was pushed by councillors who demanded that developers must pay for growth, both those for and against the dramatic increase admit it’s consumers that will pay the extra amount — almost $18,000.
“The development industry has raised huge objections to the region’s increase,” Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion told the Star. “That’s passed on to the person who buys the property. Developers add it to the cost of a house.”
Phil King, president of Orlando Corporation, was on the development industry working group that advocated against Peel’s sharp increase.
“Affordability of homes is a huge concern. More than $17,000 a unit increase on a single family home is a large number to accept,” said King, who addressed council Thursday. “Ultimately it gets passed onto the consumer, but they don’t see it. It’s the first-time buyer that gets hit the most.”
He said attempts to convince the region that some of the pricing factors they used in their cost calculations were too high, but staff and councillors didn’t listen.
King said his industry association, Building Industry and Land Development (BILD) has not yet decided whether it will appeal the increase at the Ontario Municipal Board.
McCallion said the move by regional council sends a clear message: “Our philosophy is that growth should pay its way.”
McCallion and other councillors, such as Mississauga’s Nando Iannicca, insist Peel’s new development rates are in line with other regions in the GTA and that Peel is only trying to catch up with the costs for roads, water and storm water infrastructure that development charges pay for.
“We’re saying to the industry, ‘it’s a privilege to develop here. Here are the real hard costs — you have to pay them,’” Iannicca said.
He said developers have and will continue to make a solid profit from doing business in Peel, but they must pay their fair share.
Asked if such a sharp increase might price Peel out of the market, he pointed to the staff report that shows even with the stiff increase Peel’s development charges are still competitive with Halton and York regions.
“I look out my window and don’t see development slowing down. I’m certainly not going to ask residents to subsidize developers.”
**********
There are a couple of statements which are simply not accurate in this story.
McCallion and other Councillors , such as Mississuaga's Nando Iannicca,insist Peel's new development rates are in line with other region the GTA and that Peel is only trying to catch up with the costs for roads,water and storm infrastructure that development charges pay for."
That is a deliberate distortion of fact.
Developers build the roads, water and storm infrastructure.
Municipalities do not take over responsibility for infrastructure for twenty-four months to ensure construction is sound.
Building permits are not issued for houses until servicing is complete.
Development charges are paid when permit applications are made
.
What the developers and the politicianschoose to obsure is development charges are needed to provide hard services for continued development..
Infrastructure to pump more water out of the lake to carry it farther and treat more sewage to dump back into the lake, is what development charges are paying for.
Without it, development would cease.
So why do developers and politicians collude to conceal what is really happening.?
When the stand pipe was constructed on Bloomington Side Road , we were told it was to use in a drought and only ten per cent of water used would be from Lake Ontario?
Now 75% of the water we use in York Region comes from Lake Ontario?
While new home buyers are compelled to pay $35,532 hidden tax on the home they buy, do property taxes continue to rise anyway?
Why, more particularly did we see a 12% incrase in water rates
in 2010, almost as much in 2011, again in 2012 and anticipated again in the next two years
Why, when the Region is taking money from developers to pay for growth, as they say, to protect current residents from exorbitant increases, why are current residents still experiencing exorbitant increases?
Where is the logic?
Where is the credibility?
Where is the integrity in public affairs?
Are we all expected to be part of the conspiracy?
At a recent meeting councillors from Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon voted to increase development charges for each single-family residential unit from the old rate of $17,830 to $35,532, effective Oct. 4. The increase will not apply to homes that have already received permits for construction or are well into the planning stage.
While the move was pushed by councillors who demanded that developers must pay for growth, both those for and against the dramatic increase admit it’s consumers that will pay the extra amount — almost $18,000.
“The development industry has raised huge objections to the region’s increase,” Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion told the Star. “That’s passed on to the person who buys the property. Developers add it to the cost of a house.”
Phil King, president of Orlando Corporation, was on the development industry working group that advocated against Peel’s sharp increase.
“Affordability of homes is a huge concern. More than $17,000 a unit increase on a single family home is a large number to accept,” said King, who addressed council Thursday. “Ultimately it gets passed onto the consumer, but they don’t see it. It’s the first-time buyer that gets hit the most.”
He said attempts to convince the region that some of the pricing factors they used in their cost calculations were too high, but staff and councillors didn’t listen.
King said his industry association, Building Industry and Land Development (BILD) has not yet decided whether it will appeal the increase at the Ontario Municipal Board.
McCallion said the move by regional council sends a clear message: “Our philosophy is that growth should pay its way.”
McCallion and other councillors, such as Mississauga’s Nando Iannicca, insist Peel’s new development rates are in line with other regions in the GTA and that Peel is only trying to catch up with the costs for roads, water and storm water infrastructure that development charges pay for.
“We’re saying to the industry, ‘it’s a privilege to develop here. Here are the real hard costs — you have to pay them,’” Iannicca said.
He said developers have and will continue to make a solid profit from doing business in Peel, but they must pay their fair share.
Asked if such a sharp increase might price Peel out of the market, he pointed to the staff report that shows even with the stiff increase Peel’s development charges are still competitive with Halton and York regions.
“I look out my window and don’t see development slowing down. I’m certainly not going to ask residents to subsidize developers.”
**********
There are a couple of statements which are simply not accurate in this story.
McCallion and other Councillors , such as Mississuaga's Nando Iannicca,insist Peel's new development rates are in line with other region the GTA and that Peel is only trying to catch up with the costs for roads,water and storm infrastructure that development charges pay for."
That is a deliberate distortion of fact.
Developers build the roads, water and storm infrastructure.
Municipalities do not take over responsibility for infrastructure for twenty-four months to ensure construction is sound.
Building permits are not issued for houses until servicing is complete.
Development charges are paid when permit applications are made
.
What the developers and the politicianschoose to obsure is development charges are needed to provide hard services for continued development..
Infrastructure to pump more water out of the lake to carry it farther and treat more sewage to dump back into the lake, is what development charges are paying for.
Without it, development would cease.
So why do developers and politicians collude to conceal what is really happening.?
When the stand pipe was constructed on Bloomington Side Road , we were told it was to use in a drought and only ten per cent of water used would be from Lake Ontario?
Now 75% of the water we use in York Region comes from Lake Ontario?
While new home buyers are compelled to pay $35,532 hidden tax on the home they buy, do property taxes continue to rise anyway?
Why, more particularly did we see a 12% incrase in water rates
in 2010, almost as much in 2011, again in 2012 and anticipated again in the next two years
Why, when the Region is taking money from developers to pay for growth, as they say, to protect current residents from exorbitant increases, why are current residents still experiencing exorbitant increases?
Where is the logic?
Where is the credibility?
Where is the integrity in public affairs?
Are we all expected to be part of the conspiracy?
GIVING THANKS
Great Day In The Morning
Ours to celebrate.
The right to say what we think.
See it in print .
For others to make what they like of it.
Good bad or indifferent.
This Blog started in 2007
In reaction to circumstances
That made it clear; nothing I had to say
Would make a difference
Not for sure did I know
What Blog might do
I had a hunch that's all
And hope for a clue
Encourage more action
In political affairs
Make people aware
Of the need for a change.
More did not vote
But they did engage
A decision was made
Otherwise remote
It was everything needed .
To show the power is there
When choice must be made
Things need not stay the same.
You did it once,
You can do it again
No need to wait
For years to pass
Just keep on posting
Seeing it in print
Making what can be made of it
Good bad or indifferent
Ours to celebrate.
The right to say what we think.
See it in print .
For others to make what they like of it.
Good bad or indifferent.
This Blog started in 2007
In reaction to circumstances
That made it clear; nothing I had to say
Would make a difference
Not for sure did I know
What Blog might do
I had a hunch that's all
And hope for a clue
Encourage more action
In political affairs
Make people aware
Of the need for a change.
More did not vote
But they did engage
A decision was made
Otherwise remote
It was everything needed .
To show the power is there
When choice must be made
Things need not stay the same.
You did it once,
You can do it again
No need to wait
For years to pass
Just keep on posting
Seeing it in print
Making what can be made of it
Good bad or indifferent
Sunday, 7 October 2012
Tuesday ..Decision NIght
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "You Were
Asking":
There seem to be quite a # of pendings. The streaming [late], a plan to deal with audit problems, a report on the Cultural agreement [late] etc.
********************
On Tuesday, Council will debate a consultant contract to design
joint parks and works facility, in an amount of $690,980.
It had been recommended at budget . $50,000 was approved. The larger figure is back.
The treasurer assures Council, not to worry the money is available.
Now that's a worry. If Council didn't approveit in the budget,, how can it be there?
Current facilities for parks and works abut at the end of Scanlon Court.
A study has been done. The current buildings are prefab.. Worn out and inadequate.
We created a works building and yard to make room for a joint administration building with the Board of Education when I was Mayor.
It's a fine office building on Wellington Street West.
Ross King was the architect.
The works department was the biggest blight in town and at the west entrance.
The Board of Education drove the project. George Ford was their
very efficient business administrator.
I argued we could do no less that we asked of private business and
create a fine design.
The argument was not the same for a public works building
which essentially consists of several bays for servicing trucks and equipments and a storage yard.
Public works are not contained in a building.
Parks construct parks furniture in the winter and operates a greenhouse.A storage yard is also included. Outside storage is not a pretty site. It is functional.
In my judgement, the facilities needed do not call for an architect design.
There may be no prefabricated buildings available to serve the various needs; like offices, separate showers and change facilities for men and women.
I can't help wondering how much showering and changing by employees goes on in the town's time in the buildings
When we allocated $50,000 for an analysis, I hoped the possibility of pre-fabricated building would at least be investigated.
It wasn't.
Now mustr vote to spend $690.980. give or take a dollar, for an architect to design the basic structure of public utility buildings.
I can't do that.
Space for storage is also a question .
The town contracts a substantial amount of the works function. It
saves on payroll. Benefits mainly
We had contract employees. Same principle Last budget, the treasurer recommended two contract positions be made permanent. So that theory went out the door.
Parks still have contract employees when they are needed,
Contracts apparently don't save us money in space.
Space for contractors' equipment and supplies are described in the needs analysis.
I don't understand.
If I contract someone to cut my grass, equipment is part of the contract. It is brought and taken away and is part of what I pay for.
Are contractors employee facilities available as well ?
Who pays for their shower and change time?
Is it specified in the contract?
Storage is also a question. Do we need to store a winter supply of salt and sand? Could it be delivered as needed?
How much does it cost to store heritage materials,like a dismantled barn? When ,if ever, is it likely to be used?
Tuesday, the big figure contract is on the agenda to be approved.
There's no point in bringing up the questionable wisdom of leasing the Hydro building to the Secretive Department of National Defense.
We leased it even as we knew it would be needed to accommodate the parks department and relieve the pressure on the Scanlon site.
There seem to be quite a # of pendings. The streaming [late], a plan to deal with audit problems, a report on the Cultural agreement [late] etc.
********************
On Tuesday, Council will debate a consultant contract to design
joint parks and works facility, in an amount of $690,980.
It had been recommended at budget . $50,000 was approved. The larger figure is back.
The treasurer assures Council, not to worry the money is available.
Now that's a worry. If Council didn't approveit in the budget,, how can it be there?
Current facilities for parks and works abut at the end of Scanlon Court.
A study has been done. The current buildings are prefab.. Worn out and inadequate.
We created a works building and yard to make room for a joint administration building with the Board of Education when I was Mayor.
It's a fine office building on Wellington Street West.
Ross King was the architect.
The works department was the biggest blight in town and at the west entrance.
The Board of Education drove the project. George Ford was their
very efficient business administrator.
I argued we could do no less that we asked of private business and
create a fine design.
The argument was not the same for a public works building
which essentially consists of several bays for servicing trucks and equipments and a storage yard.
Public works are not contained in a building.
Parks construct parks furniture in the winter and operates a greenhouse.A storage yard is also included. Outside storage is not a pretty site. It is functional.
In my judgement, the facilities needed do not call for an architect design.
There may be no prefabricated buildings available to serve the various needs; like offices, separate showers and change facilities for men and women.
I can't help wondering how much showering and changing by employees goes on in the town's time in the buildings
When we allocated $50,000 for an analysis, I hoped the possibility of pre-fabricated building would at least be investigated.
It wasn't.
Now mustr vote to spend $690.980. give or take a dollar, for an architect to design the basic structure of public utility buildings.
I can't do that.
Space for storage is also a question .
The town contracts a substantial amount of the works function. It
saves on payroll. Benefits mainly
We had contract employees. Same principle Last budget, the treasurer recommended two contract positions be made permanent. So that theory went out the door.
Parks still have contract employees when they are needed,
Contracts apparently don't save us money in space.
Space for contractors' equipment and supplies are described in the needs analysis.
I don't understand.
If I contract someone to cut my grass, equipment is part of the contract. It is brought and taken away and is part of what I pay for.
Are contractors employee facilities available as well ?
Who pays for their shower and change time?
Is it specified in the contract?
Storage is also a question. Do we need to store a winter supply of salt and sand? Could it be delivered as needed?
How much does it cost to store heritage materials,like a dismantled barn? When ,if ever, is it likely to be used?
Tuesday, the big figure contract is on the agenda to be approved.
There's no point in bringing up the questionable wisdom of leasing the Hydro building to the Secretive Department of National Defense.
We leased it even as we knew it would be needed to accommodate the parks department and relieve the pressure on the Scanlon site.
Friday, 5 October 2012
You Were Asking
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Recap
The Audit Situation":
"I have wondered how the Culture Centre Agreement escaped attention of the auditor. Clearly public interest was not served."
Alternatively, no fault was found. You're putting a lot of credence in this auditor's report, so you clearly have to accept that possible conclusion.
*************
I said I ""wondered" about the "agreement" and how it escaped the auditor's attention.
There was an audit of the Centre's financial afairs. No fault was found. The Centre Board were not challenged for their financial management. That statement was made several times. .
The agreement was, and is still the problem.
I do put credence in the auditor;s report. I've seen a number. I've never challenged them when everything was reported to be as it should be.
Why should there be a challenge now when things are not as they should be?
********************
.Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Recap The Audit Situation":
A question related to the audit. You say you do not recall specific errors. Will these be included in that promised report? Because if we do not know which items are in trouble, it will be hard to deal with remedies. For all we know, that Cultural Gang's Agreement might be one of the problems. Wouldn't that be a lovely present!
****************
The Financial Statement was presented to Council, as the audit committee, last Monday night.
There were questions and answers....in public.
We then went into a private meeting and continued the discussion in greater depth.
The full and unvarnished Financial Statement has been presented and must be published in both newspapers and on the town's web site.
That's the law.
When things are not as they should be, a letter is issued to management.
Management being Council.
Council is accountable . .
The community can expect to see a plan to deal with the problems..
They cannot be swept under the rug.
*******************
A separate report is pending on how the Culture Centre Agreement might be changed.
Direction was given at the beginning of March.
Meetings have been held between the Town and Centre Board.. Recommendations will soon be debated in public.
******************
A pilot study on streaming is to start in "Early Fall".
That's any day now.
*******************
I'm not sure where an account of how garbage is handled can be found.
I believe re-cyclables are shipped to a plant in Quebec for processing.
Garbage collection is done by contract with the Town by a firm called Turtle Island.
Garbage disposal is a Regional responsibility.
I have a feeling the deal with a private land fill waste site in Michigan is coming to an end.
York and Durham Regions have built an incinerator together.
It shouldn't be more expensive than shipping out of the country.
We shall see.
"I have wondered how the Culture Centre Agreement escaped attention of the auditor. Clearly public interest was not served."
Alternatively, no fault was found. You're putting a lot of credence in this auditor's report, so you clearly have to accept that possible conclusion.
*************
I said I ""wondered" about the "agreement" and how it escaped the auditor's attention.
There was an audit of the Centre's financial afairs. No fault was found. The Centre Board were not challenged for their financial management. That statement was made several times. .
The agreement was, and is still the problem.
I do put credence in the auditor;s report. I've seen a number. I've never challenged them when everything was reported to be as it should be.
Why should there be a challenge now when things are not as they should be?
********************
.Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Recap The Audit Situation":
A question related to the audit. You say you do not recall specific errors. Will these be included in that promised report? Because if we do not know which items are in trouble, it will be hard to deal with remedies. For all we know, that Cultural Gang's Agreement might be one of the problems. Wouldn't that be a lovely present!
****************
The Financial Statement was presented to Council, as the audit committee, last Monday night.
There were questions and answers....in public.
We then went into a private meeting and continued the discussion in greater depth.
The full and unvarnished Financial Statement has been presented and must be published in both newspapers and on the town's web site.
That's the law.
When things are not as they should be, a letter is issued to management.
Management being Council.
Council is accountable . .
The community can expect to see a plan to deal with the problems..
They cannot be swept under the rug.
*******************
A separate report is pending on how the Culture Centre Agreement might be changed.
Direction was given at the beginning of March.
Meetings have been held between the Town and Centre Board.. Recommendations will soon be debated in public.
******************
A pilot study on streaming is to start in "Early Fall".
That's any day now.
*******************
I'm not sure where an account of how garbage is handled can be found.
I believe re-cyclables are shipped to a plant in Quebec for processing.
Garbage collection is done by contract with the Town by a firm called Turtle Island.
Garbage disposal is a Regional responsibility.
I have a feeling the deal with a private land fill waste site in Michigan is coming to an end.
York and Durham Regions have built an incinerator together.
It shouldn't be more expensive than shipping out of the country.
We shall see.
Recap The Audit Situation
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Council
Must Act":
It sounds like opportunistic scare-mongering. After all, you do have it in for the senior management team, don't you
***************
It's always interesting to read varying reactions .
In some people's minds ,the above does not vary.
No matter what;
" Evelyn Buck is at the root of it. Pay no attention. Simply dismiss"
A politician who takes a position always takes that risk.
It's natural. It's normal. It's the way the world turns.
The sky does not fall.
I am diametrically opposed to many positions taken by senior management.
I recognise no rule that compels me to say I am in favour , if I'm.not.
I have wondered how the Culture Centre Agreement escaped attention of the auditor. Clearly public interest was not served.
I seldom let opportunity pass to state my position.
For the sake of the community, I hope to be wrong.
But experience is sufficient to believe time will permit me to say;
See......
It's more satisfying if I can prevent a decision without merit.
I try.
But mine is one opinion among nine. That is our lot.
The law requires the annual audit. It's purpose is clear.
The law requires findings to be publicly stated.
Without fear or favour.
Problems detected must be corrected.
In all my years in town affairs, this is a first, in not receiving a clean audit.
Potential for trouble has been highlighted. Correction has been advised.
To my recollection, specific errors have not been identified.
I may be the only Councillor seriously concerned.
I believe I am not.
The matter is not concluded.
.
It sounds like opportunistic scare-mongering. After all, you do have it in for the senior management team, don't you
***************
It's always interesting to read varying reactions .
In some people's minds ,the above does not vary.
No matter what;
" Evelyn Buck is at the root of it. Pay no attention. Simply dismiss"
A politician who takes a position always takes that risk.
It's natural. It's normal. It's the way the world turns.
The sky does not fall.
I am diametrically opposed to many positions taken by senior management.
I recognise no rule that compels me to say I am in favour , if I'm.not.
I have wondered how the Culture Centre Agreement escaped attention of the auditor. Clearly public interest was not served.
I seldom let opportunity pass to state my position.
For the sake of the community, I hope to be wrong.
But experience is sufficient to believe time will permit me to say;
See......
It's more satisfying if I can prevent a decision without merit.
I try.
But mine is one opinion among nine. That is our lot.
The law requires the annual audit. It's purpose is clear.
The law requires findings to be publicly stated.
Without fear or favour.
Problems detected must be corrected.
In all my years in town affairs, this is a first, in not receiving a clean audit.
Potential for trouble has been highlighted. Correction has been advised.
To my recollection, specific errors have not been identified.
I may be the only Councillor seriously concerned.
I believe I am not.
The matter is not concluded.
.
Thursday, 4 October 2012
Council Must Act
The situation is not concluded.
Auditors have a legal responsibility to inform a Council of
unsatisfactory performance in the town's accounting procedures.
No evidence was found of wrongdoing.
Lack of proper of appropriate checks and balances, staff qualifications and training and management oversight , all provide an environment ripe with opportunity for wrong doing.
In previous years Council has been informed of insufficient staff in the finance department. Council moved to correct by authorizing more staff.
This situation also requires a Council decision.
Council is obliged to action. .
Failure to do so is a failure to govern by those to whom you delegated YOUR AUTHORITY and who are themselves governed by law.
An Auditor's Report noting serious deficiencies is not a slap on the wrist.
It requires correction.
Brace yourselves.
Auditors have a legal responsibility to inform a Council of
unsatisfactory performance in the town's accounting procedures.
No evidence was found of wrongdoing.
Lack of proper of appropriate checks and balances, staff qualifications and training and management oversight , all provide an environment ripe with opportunity for wrong doing.
In previous years Council has been informed of insufficient staff in the finance department. Council moved to correct by authorizing more staff.
This situation also requires a Council decision.
Council is obliged to action. .
Failure to do so is a failure to govern by those to whom you delegated YOUR AUTHORITY and who are themselves governed by law.
An Auditor's Report noting serious deficiencies is not a slap on the wrist.
It requires correction.
Brace yourselves.
The Law Requires It.... Auditors must tell
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Wherefore
Ombudsman?":
Sorry. I'm playing catch up & the meeting was not streamed. Who found the mistakes? Council members or Staff?
*************
The law requires corporations to have annual audits prepared and presented to the shareholders.
A municipality is no different. Taxpayers are the shareholders.
Monday night Council met as the Audit Committee to receive in public the annual financial statement from the town's auditors.
Findings were set out in a public meeting.
Council were provided with an agenda for a closed meeting to receive a report from staff following the auditor's presentation.
Two reasons were given. One was for the security of property; the second to protect individual privacy.
I was able to accept the second reason.
I am not going to post the financial statement.
I can state there is no evidence of wrong-doing .
The auditors are legally responsible to report what they found during the audit.
If everything is as it should be, they say so.
If things are not as they should be, they say so.
They make observations on their findings.
The audit took longer than usual.Presentation was late
Information requested from staff took longer to receive.
There appears to be a lack of qualifications and training; a management responsibility.
I must try to keep separate public comments from the closed session exchange. Public revelations were the reason for private discussion.
There is no way to sugar-coat the situation.
Two specific issues may help to clarify:
$2 million received for naming rights of the rec complex have been
received in annual instalments. At the time of the deal, Council,
directed, the annual instalment be directed to making the debenture payment on the facility.
It was built years before it was scheduled and development charges were not on hand to pay for it.
It seems, $1.2 million dollars of the funds found their way into the development charge reserve fund. They did not belong there and it took time to discover that's where they were.
$1.2 million dollars is not chicken feed. Not being able to find it
must have caused tension.
$700,000 lost revenue was a different issue.
Five golf courses appealed their assessment. In 2011, three appeals were decided and the town lost $700,000 in assessment revenue.
There was a shortfall .
A third problem was handling of grants from the Federal government for "shovel-ready" projects. The grants were new. No process was in place to handle receipts and payment from the grant.
I am not a accountant. A clean audit has always been of vital importance to myself as a scrupulous amateur.
From a Councillor's perspective, despite assurances of no evidence of fraud, this situation is a worry. .
A previous Council directed the payment for naming rights to the annual payment on the debenture debt for the recreation centre.
If it wasn't used for that purpose, where did the money come from for the annual payment?
The treasurer plans to write a report..
$325,000 represents a point in the tax rate. Did we include the payment in the operating budget? Was the budget increase a point higher than it needed to be?
$1.2 million went into the Development Charge Reserve fund. It didn't belong there. It swelled the fund by that amount.The fund is currently in deficit. It means we spent money on something we didn't have money for.
The artificial turf at St Max's High School perhaps.
The money will have to be repaid.
Funds for a teen centre will e impacted. .
.
A loss of $700,000 revenue in 2011, due to successful appeals by three golf courses, skews last year's budget figures by that amount That much revenue lost sends last year's tax increase up by another two points.
Two more golf courses are likely to have successful appeals in 2012. It means total revenue from golf courses has been overestimated by a $1 million.
It means the 2012 budget adopted by Council and the resultant tax increase imposed were not accurate. .
For high rollers, it may seem like small potatoes.
For a scrupulous amateur like myself, I am not sublime.
.
Sorry. I'm playing catch up & the meeting was not streamed. Who found the mistakes? Council members or Staff?
*************
The law requires corporations to have annual audits prepared and presented to the shareholders.
A municipality is no different. Taxpayers are the shareholders.
Monday night Council met as the Audit Committee to receive in public the annual financial statement from the town's auditors.
Findings were set out in a public meeting.
Council were provided with an agenda for a closed meeting to receive a report from staff following the auditor's presentation.
Two reasons were given. One was for the security of property; the second to protect individual privacy.
I was able to accept the second reason.
I am not going to post the financial statement.
I can state there is no evidence of wrong-doing .
The auditors are legally responsible to report what they found during the audit.
If everything is as it should be, they say so.
If things are not as they should be, they say so.
They make observations on their findings.
The audit took longer than usual.Presentation was late
Information requested from staff took longer to receive.
There appears to be a lack of qualifications and training; a management responsibility.
I must try to keep separate public comments from the closed session exchange. Public revelations were the reason for private discussion.
There is no way to sugar-coat the situation.
Two specific issues may help to clarify:
$2 million received for naming rights of the rec complex have been
received in annual instalments. At the time of the deal, Council,
directed, the annual instalment be directed to making the debenture payment on the facility.
It was built years before it was scheduled and development charges were not on hand to pay for it.
It seems, $1.2 million dollars of the funds found their way into the development charge reserve fund. They did not belong there and it took time to discover that's where they were.
$1.2 million dollars is not chicken feed. Not being able to find it
must have caused tension.
$700,000 lost revenue was a different issue.
Five golf courses appealed their assessment. In 2011, three appeals were decided and the town lost $700,000 in assessment revenue.
There was a shortfall .
A third problem was handling of grants from the Federal government for "shovel-ready" projects. The grants were new. No process was in place to handle receipts and payment from the grant.
I am not a accountant. A clean audit has always been of vital importance to myself as a scrupulous amateur.
From a Councillor's perspective, despite assurances of no evidence of fraud, this situation is a worry. .
A previous Council directed the payment for naming rights to the annual payment on the debenture debt for the recreation centre.
If it wasn't used for that purpose, where did the money come from for the annual payment?
The treasurer plans to write a report..
$325,000 represents a point in the tax rate. Did we include the payment in the operating budget? Was the budget increase a point higher than it needed to be?
$1.2 million went into the Development Charge Reserve fund. It didn't belong there. It swelled the fund by that amount.The fund is currently in deficit. It means we spent money on something we didn't have money for.
The artificial turf at St Max's High School perhaps.
The money will have to be repaid.
Funds for a teen centre will e impacted. .
.
A loss of $700,000 revenue in 2011, due to successful appeals by three golf courses, skews last year's budget figures by that amount That much revenue lost sends last year's tax increase up by another two points.
Two more golf courses are likely to have successful appeals in 2012. It means total revenue from golf courses has been overestimated by a $1 million.
It means the 2012 budget adopted by Council and the resultant tax increase imposed were not accurate. .
For high rollers, it may seem like small potatoes.
For a scrupulous amateur like myself, I am not sublime.
.
Wednesday, 3 October 2012
Wherefore Ombudsman?
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Things You
Hear":
Quoting from the Toronto Star - "Ombudsman slams Sudbury council for lack of cooperation in investigation"
Our office will not tolerate municipal officials engaging in legal gamesmanship or political gymnastics in order to evade accounting for their actions when we investigate complaints that they met secretly and illegally to conduct city business."
Does Aurora have an ombudsman? SHOULD WE?
**********
The auditor's report was received in an open meeting.
Errors were disclosed.
Council is obligated by regulation to protect the privacy of an individual.
Responsibility for errors may implicate an indvidual
For that reason, the closed door meeting is legitimate.
A further report is forthcoming.
Provincial law provides for the right to request an investigation if an individual believes something illegal has happened.
The town retains a firm of investigators should such a request be received.
Nothing I have written should be taken to mean, Council has done anything illegal.
We are dealing with an unusual situation .
We need to use all the facility provided to do it fairly. .
.
**************
That's a harsh statement for the Ontario Ombudsman to make about the City of Sudbury. Unless he is prepared to back it up with evidence that "municipal officials are engaging in legal gamemanship and political gymnastics in order to evade accounting for their actions"
There are two classes of municipal officials.; elected and administrative.
Politicians can defend themselves against intemperate language, whatever its source. .
Public servants can not.
Whence accountability of The Ontario Ombudsman ?
Who elected him ?
Or is he there by Divine Intercession?
Quoting from the Toronto Star - "Ombudsman slams Sudbury council for lack of cooperation in investigation"
Our office will not tolerate municipal officials engaging in legal gamesmanship or political gymnastics in order to evade accounting for their actions when we investigate complaints that they met secretly and illegally to conduct city business."
Does Aurora have an ombudsman? SHOULD WE?
**********
The auditor's report was received in an open meeting.
Errors were disclosed.
Council is obligated by regulation to protect the privacy of an individual.
Responsibility for errors may implicate an indvidual
For that reason, the closed door meeting is legitimate.
A further report is forthcoming.
Provincial law provides for the right to request an investigation if an individual believes something illegal has happened.
The town retains a firm of investigators should such a request be received.
Nothing I have written should be taken to mean, Council has done anything illegal.
We are dealing with an unusual situation .
We need to use all the facility provided to do it fairly. .
.
**************
That's a harsh statement for the Ontario Ombudsman to make about the City of Sudbury. Unless he is prepared to back it up with evidence that "municipal officials are engaging in legal gamemanship and political gymnastics in order to evade accounting for their actions"
There are two classes of municipal officials.; elected and administrative.
Politicians can defend themselves against intemperate language, whatever its source. .
Public servants can not.
Whence accountability of The Ontario Ombudsman ?
Who elected him ?
Or is he there by Divine Intercession?
The Report Will Be Prompt
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Things You
Hear":
Ah. But WHEN will there be a report?
**************
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Things You Hear":
Once again Evelyn Buck weaves a story about old vs new and then tempts us all with some sort of wrong doing - but she can't tell us about it.
I ask, if it is worthy enough to skirt around, then tell us the full story. You claim that you use this vehicle to inform.
If you cannot tell all, I suggest that you leave it behind the closed door until you can. All you are doing now is creating innuendo
**************
Mais non, Mon Ami
The first part of the Audit Committee meeting was open.
Problems were revealed. and discussed to a certain point.
There is no innuendo
Things are not as they should be.
This morning's post makes it clear.
When I've had breakfast ,I may get back to it. Or I may decide to do it to-morrow.
I am not working to a time clock. There are seven other Councillors and the Mayor who might fill you in on details in the meantime.
Ah. But WHEN will there be a report?
**************
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Things You Hear":
Once again Evelyn Buck weaves a story about old vs new and then tempts us all with some sort of wrong doing - but she can't tell us about it.
I ask, if it is worthy enough to skirt around, then tell us the full story. You claim that you use this vehicle to inform.
If you cannot tell all, I suggest that you leave it behind the closed door until you can. All you are doing now is creating innuendo
**************
Mais non, Mon Ami
The first part of the Audit Committee meeting was open.
Problems were revealed. and discussed to a certain point.
There is no innuendo
Things are not as they should be.
This morning's post makes it clear.
When I've had breakfast ,I may get back to it. Or I may decide to do it to-morrow.
I am not working to a time clock. There are seven other Councillors and the Mayor who might fill you in on details in the meantime.
Things You Hear
"Scrupulosity of an amateur" is a phrase heard in my teens.
A priest used it in a sermon from the altar. the sermon is long gone but the phrase remains.
It may have stayed with me because it is so apt.
As an elected representative, I need to keep it constant..
It's important not to go off half-cocked ..
I ask. I probe.I pose contrasts. I seek clarification.
It may well be tedious for colleagues.
I begin with intuition . I know better than to form a conclusion without having all the facts.
My task is to inform and persuade . First I must secure my own understanding. .
Without it, I lose credibility.
It's becoming difficult in council. Colleagues don't share my understanding of the responsibility.
We had a couple of odd meetings this week.
On Monday, Council met as the audit committee. A second part of the meeting was behind closed doors.
Not talking about the second part, makes talking about the first part, tricky.
The second part was directly related to the first part
*********************
The Audit Committee is constituted to receive the annual audited financial statement.
The Statements are published. Seldom do they draw attention.
In my early days, Financial Statements were distributed at annual nomination meetings.
Elections were held every twelve months.It was fitting for the financial accounting to accompany nominations for office.
In 1967, for the first time, Aurora's budget topped a million.
Budgets were always clear and easily understood
The first principle of taxation is they should be clearly and easily understood.
Operating expenses. Debt. Revenue.
Costs rise. Assessment growth pays.
No growth. Costs increase. Taxes rise.
Continual substantial tax increases, accompanied by substantial growth, means a complacent Council not doing its job.
Tax increases are not a given.
Budgets process is simple; Actual spending from the previous year must be available. How much more it will take to maintain the same level of service. How much extra to fund necessary increases.
How much left over to improve the level of service. .
In the past, we talked about building reserves to replace worn out equipment. Sometimes we created one. We almost always had to spend it before the year was out.
We never ended the year in a deficit. Regulations do not permit municipalities to budget for a deficit.
We had a water reserve. A flat rate of about $7.50 a quarter.paid what it cost to pump water out of the ground and put money in the bank. We borrowed from it when we needed to. Paid it back with interest.
The water bill came out with the hydro bill.
Sewers were on the tax bill. Everybody paid.
Call me stupid. Some will I know.
But I'm inclined to think how things were done in the past is releavnt to how they are done today.
Budgets are no longer easily understood.W create reserve accounts that tally into the millions.on the backs of property owners.
We replace equipment willy-nilly.
We adopt a strategic plan that presents as its goal " exceptional quality of life for all residents"
Who do we think we are?.
We cite the goal in every staff report. And we authorize staff to budget to achieve an exceptional quality of life for all. .
Imagine that; "And exceptional quality of life for all.
Did you knowyou were voting for in the last election.?
If a candidate with a straight face promised that, would you have taken him at his word?
We paid a consultant $80,000. to come up with that verbiage.
We tax current property owners so that people living here twenty years from now, will be able to enjoy amenities we paid for with higher taxes than were needed to meet our own needs. .
Budget documents are no longer decipherable.Even the figures are like spider tracks.
Just weeks ago, Councillor Gallo discovered a six digit figure, twice listed for the same project in the Capital Construction forecast.
It was a mistake.
During budget deliberations, we are assured the Capital Construction forecast does not affect the operating budget or the tax rate.
Yet, once approved, it moves forward like a juggernaut to be used in the next year's budget calculation.
On Monday night ,the Audit Committee (Council) received a disturbing report . Things are not as they should be. Certain factors were disclosed.
To protect privacy of the individual, Council went behind closed doors with the auditors to dig deeper into the matter
There will be a report.
.
.
A priest used it in a sermon from the altar. the sermon is long gone but the phrase remains.
It may have stayed with me because it is so apt.
As an elected representative, I need to keep it constant..
It's important not to go off half-cocked ..
I ask. I probe.I pose contrasts. I seek clarification.
It may well be tedious for colleagues.
I begin with intuition . I know better than to form a conclusion without having all the facts.
My task is to inform and persuade . First I must secure my own understanding. .
Without it, I lose credibility.
It's becoming difficult in council. Colleagues don't share my understanding of the responsibility.
We had a couple of odd meetings this week.
On Monday, Council met as the audit committee. A second part of the meeting was behind closed doors.
Not talking about the second part, makes talking about the first part, tricky.
The second part was directly related to the first part
*********************
The Audit Committee is constituted to receive the annual audited financial statement.
The Statements are published. Seldom do they draw attention.
In my early days, Financial Statements were distributed at annual nomination meetings.
Elections were held every twelve months.It was fitting for the financial accounting to accompany nominations for office.
In 1967, for the first time, Aurora's budget topped a million.
Budgets were always clear and easily understood
The first principle of taxation is they should be clearly and easily understood.
Operating expenses. Debt. Revenue.
Costs rise. Assessment growth pays.
No growth. Costs increase. Taxes rise.
Continual substantial tax increases, accompanied by substantial growth, means a complacent Council not doing its job.
Tax increases are not a given.
Budgets process is simple; Actual spending from the previous year must be available. How much more it will take to maintain the same level of service. How much extra to fund necessary increases.
How much left over to improve the level of service. .
In the past, we talked about building reserves to replace worn out equipment. Sometimes we created one. We almost always had to spend it before the year was out.
We never ended the year in a deficit. Regulations do not permit municipalities to budget for a deficit.
We had a water reserve. A flat rate of about $7.50 a quarter.paid what it cost to pump water out of the ground and put money in the bank. We borrowed from it when we needed to. Paid it back with interest.
The water bill came out with the hydro bill.
Sewers were on the tax bill. Everybody paid.
Call me stupid. Some will I know.
But I'm inclined to think how things were done in the past is releavnt to how they are done today.
Budgets are no longer easily understood.W create reserve accounts that tally into the millions.on the backs of property owners.
We replace equipment willy-nilly.
We adopt a strategic plan that presents as its goal " exceptional quality of life for all residents"
Who do we think we are?.
We cite the goal in every staff report. And we authorize staff to budget to achieve an exceptional quality of life for all. .
Imagine that; "And exceptional quality of life for all.
Did you knowyou were voting for in the last election.?
If a candidate with a straight face promised that, would you have taken him at his word?
We paid a consultant $80,000. to come up with that verbiage.
We tax current property owners so that people living here twenty years from now, will be able to enjoy amenities we paid for with higher taxes than were needed to meet our own needs. .
Budget documents are no longer decipherable.Even the figures are like spider tracks.
Just weeks ago, Councillor Gallo discovered a six digit figure, twice listed for the same project in the Capital Construction forecast.
It was a mistake.
During budget deliberations, we are assured the Capital Construction forecast does not affect the operating budget or the tax rate.
Yet, once approved, it moves forward like a juggernaut to be used in the next year's budget calculation.
On Monday night ,the Audit Committee (Council) received a disturbing report . Things are not as they should be. Certain factors were disclosed.
To protect privacy of the individual, Council went behind closed doors with the auditors to dig deeper into the matter
There will be a report.
.
.
Monday, 1 October 2012
I am not..what I have not...claimed to be
Sharon Brookes has left a new comment on your post "Cowardy,Cowardy
Custard":
Councillor Buck , I hate to agree with this last post, but I had the same thought. Even though you make many important comments or presentations to council meetings, you can drag on or go off topic. Ms. Gaertner is an entirely different issue.
************
Sharon...Thank you for your name andexpression of reluctance to agree that I can drag on and go off topic.
I am not what I do not claim to be.
No doubt you are right.
Depending on your generation, what I have to say, may seem like dragging on and going off topic.
You might agree, extent and years of involvement might have something to contribute to the situation.
It means I have to exercise more discipline. I have to choose between many points to make in a debate.
We do tend to be our own worst critics.A debate means being able to think on one's feet, so-to-speak and respond to points made.
Sometimes, as many as five have spoken before my turn .
It means retaining points made by others so as not to miss the opportunity to refute.The objective is to persuade.
It's easier to exercise discipline when order is being maintained
by the presiding member.
Nothing is more distracting or exasperating than to be interrupted by spurious points of order; a member disagree with a point being made, thinks a point of order.is in order. It is not.
A competent chair,maintains order throughout. Seldom should a point of order be necessary from the floor.
A consistent reminder from the chair to speak to the question. helps all members to acquire discipline.
A member being accused of not telling the truth, is a breach of order.
The chair's failure to call the member to order and require the comment be withdrawn is an equally egregious.
A question directed by the chair for the Clerk to answer. The Clerk obliged to observe the obvious ." there is no answer" is a failure of the chair.
The chair alone has responsibility for maintaining order.
It takes confidence, experience, knowledge, skill, impartiality and consistency to do the job properly.
If these skills are missing, there's no advantage for any member to observe the rules
Council meetings become a free-for-all .
I don't apologise for using past experience to support an argument.
Those who share my experience appreciateit. I am not alone in the community I serve.
At the same time I know Councillors with no background in the town's affairs are extremely conscious and threatenedby the fact.
I have been informed the past has no relevance
.I don't accept that.
While the presiding member flails hopelessly and helplessly at the job of maintaining order, it's natural to look for people to blame. .
It's not admirable.
Things do not improve.
Next time a ruling is challenged, support needed for a vote of confidence may fail to emerge. .
It's not a good place to be.
We do the best we can in the circumstances.
Sometimes we do it right.
Sometimes we don't.
Councillor Buck , I hate to agree with this last post, but I had the same thought. Even though you make many important comments or presentations to council meetings, you can drag on or go off topic. Ms. Gaertner is an entirely different issue.
************
Sharon...Thank you for your name andexpression of reluctance to agree that I can drag on and go off topic.
I am not what I do not claim to be.
No doubt you are right.
Depending on your generation, what I have to say, may seem like dragging on and going off topic.
You might agree, extent and years of involvement might have something to contribute to the situation.
It means I have to exercise more discipline. I have to choose between many points to make in a debate.
We do tend to be our own worst critics.A debate means being able to think on one's feet, so-to-speak and respond to points made.
Sometimes, as many as five have spoken before my turn .
It means retaining points made by others so as not to miss the opportunity to refute.The objective is to persuade.
It's easier to exercise discipline when order is being maintained
by the presiding member.
Nothing is more distracting or exasperating than to be interrupted by spurious points of order; a member disagree with a point being made, thinks a point of order.is in order. It is not.
A competent chair,maintains order throughout. Seldom should a point of order be necessary from the floor.
A consistent reminder from the chair to speak to the question. helps all members to acquire discipline.
A member being accused of not telling the truth, is a breach of order.
The chair's failure to call the member to order and require the comment be withdrawn is an equally egregious.
A question directed by the chair for the Clerk to answer. The Clerk obliged to observe the obvious ." there is no answer" is a failure of the chair.
The chair alone has responsibility for maintaining order.
It takes confidence, experience, knowledge, skill, impartiality and consistency to do the job properly.
If these skills are missing, there's no advantage for any member to observe the rules
Council meetings become a free-for-all .
I don't apologise for using past experience to support an argument.
Those who share my experience appreciateit. I am not alone in the community I serve.
At the same time I know Councillors with no background in the town's affairs are extremely conscious and threatenedby the fact.
I have been informed the past has no relevance
.I don't accept that.
While the presiding member flails hopelessly and helplessly at the job of maintaining order, it's natural to look for people to blame. .
It's not admirable.
Things do not improve.
Next time a ruling is challenged, support needed for a vote of confidence may fail to emerge. .
It's not a good place to be.
We do the best we can in the circumstances.
Sometimes we do it right.
Sometimes we don't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
