Isn’t it amazing
By David ChawnerIsn’t it amazing – there are people, including councillor/s, complaining about “ all the negativity in the media” and yet there is a simple solution – all Council has to do is be honest and straight forward with the people who will have to pay the bills! Frankly, if they are referring to me, I DON’T CARE. If I ask a question I expect to get an honest answer, which is my RIGHT – it’s MY money (and yours), not silence or B.S. The M.G.A. (Municipal Govt. Act) says – “all information that can be made public – should be” – and the restrictions are minimal.
We don’t have $1.3 in debt, or even just long term debt, the person that who put that figure out – ‘in the interests of getting the truth out there’- obviously can’t even read the County’s (audited) Financial Statement – were they working for me … they wouldn’t be!. Our long-term debt is more that $3 mill. (oops, ‘that was a misstep that we won’t repeat’ according to the C.F.O.) and our TOTAL debt, as of 1st Jan 2014, was more than $14 MILLION (see the Russell Farmer report)- how much has been added since???
Mr. Hegy, in his Letter to the Editor says that Council should operate more as a Board of Directors in a public Co. because they can’t interfere in the day-to-day operations of the employees, and he’s right in some ways, but a Board of Directors is responsible for safeguarding the interests of the SHAREHOLDERS - that’s us in the County structure, which he obviously hasn’t grasped yet – because this Council has operated more to promote their own ambitions than in the interests of the shareholders. A Board of Directors controls the activities of the CEO (C.A.O. in our case) by putting policies in place, but this Council has consistently failed to do that.
He has failed to understand that this not a four-year dictatorship but a democracy where every-one has the right to express their opinion and expect to be heard and represented – messy and frustrating as it is, it’s better than any other system out there, and issuing statements that, in effect, say “we’ll do what we want, when we want and you’ll just have to pay the bill regardless” does not advance that concept nor fulfill their obligations to us. In his re-election material he claims that he has started re-building relationships with the municipalities within L.S.A. – obviously forgetting that it was under this Council’s watch that those relationships were destroyed to the point that several of those municipalities signed a letter to the Minister of Mun. Affairs requesting that he investigate the activities of L.S.A. and that there is an on-going legal battle between L.S.A. and North West (Onoway’s Fire Provider) because North West rendered aid when they came across an accident on Hwy. 37, which is outside their area of operation. That is costing both sets of taxpayers money for legal fees, in spite of the fact that Mun. Affairs INSTRUCTED them to reach a Mutual Aid Agreement. That should never have been started and should have been stopped immediately the Agreement was in place. But then, if it’s about egos and status, obviously this Council feels that it’s o.k.
The Russell Farmer report into how Council acted during the ‘Taj Mahal’ fiasco – (it’s already built, it’s done, so I don’t understand why they would need us to pay for a report to justify their actions) - also says that “it is appropriate to raise the question of why M.S.I. funding was not considered at this time” which was when Council was trying to long-term fund it originally. Well it isn’t appropriate because I contacted Mun. Affairs and they said M.S.I. funding could NOT be used because it was not guaranteed year to year, and, under the M.G.A., total funding had to be in place BEFORE work could start.
It also advocated that recorded votes not be taken, partly because individual councillors might try to obtain a political advantage by demonstrating their opposition to a motion – that would mean that if you were able to get to the Council meeting you would know how your councillor voted, but if you had to rely on the minutes, you wouldn’t --- if that’s not an attack on your democratic rights, I don’t know what is.
David Chawner.
The Russell Farmer report into how Council acted during the ‘Taj Mahal’ fiasco – (it’s already built, it’s done, so I don’t understand why they would need us to pay for a report to justify their actions) - also says that “it is appropriate to raise the question of why M.S.I. funding was not considered at this time” which was when Council was trying to long-term fund it originally. Well it isn’t appropriate because I contacted Mun. Affairs and they said M.S.I. funding could NOT be used because it was not guaranteed year to year, and, under the M.G.A., total funding had to be in place BEFORE work could start.
It also advocated that recorded votes not be taken, partly because individual councillors might try to obtain a political advantage by demonstrating their opposition to a motion – that would mean that if you were able to get to the Council meeting you would know how your councillor voted, but if you had to rely on the minutes, you wouldn’t --- if that’s not an attack on your democratic rights, I don’t know what is.
David Chawner.
0 comments:
Post a Comment