More Of The Same At City Hall
Wednesday, February 22, 2012 @ 3:45 AM
If the citizens were looking for a new approach to the reverse petition, the way in which City councils in BC are able to pass money by laws without seeking a referendum, they didn’t get it Monday night.
To his credit, the only person who voted against the petition to borrow money to build dikes along River Road was newly elected Councillor Frank Everitt. He made his position clear during the election, mind you so did a number of others, but then talk is cheap and the argument that it would cost too much money to hold a referendum doesn’t hold water.
Better to spend the 55 to 65 thousand dollars allowing the people of the city to decide what they think is best then to try and make the taxpayers believe that you have their best interests at heart.
The project which will see the City need to borrow $3.5 million is a matter that is hotly debated. The engineers have said that we need this to prevent a flood every fifty years or so, while many of the citizen’s point to an easy solution that would call for the taking of gravel from the mouth of the Nechako every year to build a proper flow stream into the Fraser during the winter.
The engineers pooh- pooh the idea, they remember however are the bunch who were dumping warm water into the Nechako during the last ice jam to break the ice jam on the river.
To the City’s credit God came along and opened a channel eliminating the entire problem.
Can we dredge the little arm that flows from the Nechako into the Fraser without reaching the mouth?
Of course we can. The river was trying on its own to create that flow during the last flood , but the smart minds said the feds wouldn’t allow it to be dredged and besides it wouldn’t work. Well again God cut a channel and the water went around the ice jam at the confluence. Good engineering? Hardly.
Then it should be pointed out that the then minister of Federal Fisheries gave the go ahead for the dredging because of the flood but the brains of the day said it wouldn’t work and never called him back.
That, along with a host of other reasons, is why the taxpayers would like to have a say in the matter but they won’t, well unless they of course find some way to take it upon themselves and the community at large to mount a signature taking petition which now calls for 10% of the voters . That figure exceeds what in many elections we see at the ballot box.
So open your pocket folks, its a case of the same old, same old, just a few new faces.
I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.
Comments
Once again council and the AAP go hand in hand. There seems to be no end to the debt the city will take on just to get a hand out from the province or feds. Counting the River road improvements the sum of money spent or to be spent is 10 of millions of dollars yet the roads of PG continue to fall apart at an alarming rate and city hall is oblivious to the fact. The hill on Ospika leading to Tyner is pothole laced and not better than a cattle trail yet a good source has indicated the city paving budget is on the table for reduction.
For the taxpayer it is just absolutely frustrating to have these people elected and once in office proceed with their own agenda as if the electorate does not even exist.
“The hill on Ospika leading to Tyner is pothole laced and not better than a cattle trail yet a good source has indicated the city paving budget is on the table for reduction.”
After having pointed out a similar (potentially worse) stretch of road the explanation was that although it is agreed that the condition is less than ideal it is mostly attributable to a somewhat reduced level of comfort while traversing it.
Great wordplay, zero results.
While other city’s have “groundhog day” the city of Prince George has “pothole season”. Both are used to indicate the continuation of winter or the being of spring.
PrinceGeorge.
Love the play on words, “somewhat reduced level of comfort”. Oh so city hall.
“For the taxpayer it is just absolutely frustrating to have these people elected and once in office proceed with their own agenda as if the electorate does not even exist.”
I think one of the obvious “problems”, or maybe I should be using the more PC word “challenges” is that there are those who think they will bring saner heads to Council, but they really do not know or understand the “challenges” this City faces, so they blurt out all this well intentioned thoughts which many of us in this community have, but when push comes to shove, they really do not have a clue what they can do to change anything.
We essentially vote for a few of them, not because their words at election time are much better than the others who are running; we vote for them because we know them, have seen them operate with other public things they have dealt with, hear from friends that they did a lot of work here and there and that they are doers in the community.
We vote for them on trust.
However, reality sets in shortly after they sit in the Council chambers.
That reality set in once more as I watched this week’s Council meeting and at least three Councillors, Koehler, Everitt, and Hall, became totally frustrated with the reaction from administration, primarily Soltis and Babicz. When Councillors suggested other sources of money be found to pay for this rather than borrowing, such as selling some of the land in the downtown which is seen to be sitting idle, the response was that approving the borrowing request would not mean that we would actually be borrowing.
I can understand that we need to put money in place between now and 2015 when the money is actually projected to be required and that we are bound to have 100% assurance of that prior to the City signing the deal with other funding “partners”.
What I cannot understand is that administration cut new Councillors some slack and try to work with them. In other words, understand what they were really seeking and making suggestions of how they can be worked with.
It is possible to work on several processes in parallel. People do it all the time. People who like to be accommodating do it all the time. None of that came out. It was cut and dried business language that was flying back and forth. Councillors gave way. Councillors are too nice.
When negotiating and essentially that is what it was, the first one to blink loses. All three Councillors blinked out of frustration before administration blinked. Everitt at least voted against the motion.
Not a single one of them then put forth a motion that asked administration to work on other project financing sources. The issue of selling property was not brought forward again. A good thought to get that off people’s chests. It is still sitting there in one or more Councillors mind(s). It is certainly sitting in many people’s minds in the community.
That was an opportunity to get it out, even if it is discussed in private session since it deals with property and it is allowed to be held in private session, although it does not need to be.
Another one of those things that can be shared with the public. That is the general policy around land acquisition in the downtown as a strategy in promoting the development of the downtown and even the development of the City’s real estate asset portfolio. There is nothing that ought to be private about that.
I think the reason this is going ahead is because the downtown PG group. They know the water table is only feet below the surface, and they know that is an issue for any developer. They think if we have an expensive dike built they can sell it as a safe investment… ignoring that the water peculates up as is evidenced every time the rivers are high.
The province wants to build a 10-story woody on swamp land, and the powers that be at city hall and their developer friends see this as their out. You can’t build a 10-story woody on swamp land with water table issues. Stick the bill to the home owners of PG and keep pushing downtown on George, rather then refocus on Victoria west. Its more of the same old shameful shameful that makes PG the corrupted insider hick town it is.
They don’t have 65,000.00 for a referendum but they have a almost a million bucks for city council to pee away at their pleasure.
Cheers
“To the City’s credit God came along and opened a channel eliminating the entire problem.”
I think it wasn’t God but a ice jam clearing machine called an Amphibex!
“Can we dredge the little arm that flows from the Nechako into the Fraser without reaching the mouth? Of course we can.”
We can do a lot of things that make sense! But, why do it the easy way when we usually do it the costly and complicated way first?
The mayor ran on a platform of fiscal prudency. No sooner than right after the election reality sets in for us. It’s still the same old – increase taxes and increase spending! Just saw her on TV the other day preaching about being more careful with the money! She says that the credit card of the city is very close to being MAXED out! Then, incredibly, this is followed by – we must borrow at least another $3.5 million (adding to the almost maxed out credir card!)and dip into one of the city’s contingency funds for an even greater sum to for constructing the dike/dyke!
Our groundhog doesn’t pop out of a hole in the ground! It pops out of one of the smaller potholes!
Gus I don’t know if it is because the Councillors are too nice and back down or they learn very quickly that they can not rock the boat. A retired Coucillor told me that he got on the wrong side of the administration and they made sure that he did not get the information he need for inform debates.
Your comment on the 10-story on swamp land makes more sense than the comment that they must protect the River Rd and area. But the dike on River Road will not get rid the underground river system. Look at some of the very old pictures of PG and you can see where the old streams flowed as they are tree lined. The only reason we have so many underground rivers in PG now is over the years they have filled in the land but the water still flows.
Opps. Forgot all about the amphibex that came to the city and broke the ice jam open from the Fraser.
Forgive me. But as long as we are are on that point, it wasnât the Engineers working on the flood that recommended it in fact they didnât. It came about as a result of the Provincial Emergencies people insisting that the machine be given a try, and the Engineers had to give way because it was the province that was paying for it.
The idea came from a local citizen and was raised by Opinion250 to the province who went to work on it.
The actual amount of money that will be spent on River Road *excluding the money spent by the Province for the 2007/08 flood* amounts to $18.4 Million. This amount does not include the interest of $580,000.00 per year for the $7 Million the City is borrowing.
Ie; $3.5 Million borrowed for the upgrade to River Road last year, and the $3.5 million they will borrow for the diking this year.
So considering that the threat of another flood is remote, why are we spending all this money. Especially in an area that for all intents and purposes is on its last legs as an industrial park.
Of the $18.4 Million $9.5 Million is PG Taxpayers dollars. Plus interest.
People in PG need to do something more than complain if they want to stop the City from this incessant borrowing. The only tool available at this time is the Alternative Approval Process. So start thinking now about signing the form, and start talking to your freinds and neibours to do the same. It can be done, however it will require a huge effort by a lot of people.
In addition I suggest that you send emails to the Councillors, and the Mayor and advise them that you disagree with the continued borrowing.
Do nothing and they win.
“A retired Coucillor told me that he got on the wrong side of the administration and they made sure that he did not get the information he need for inform debates.”
What a load of BS. Not only is this illegal, said Councilor should have brought it forward publically then. Crying wolf after the fact is a cop out. Sounds like someone didn’t get their way and was playing the blame game. Call the Wah-mbulance.
I agree Palopu. Where do we get the form or go to sign the form????
Comments for this article are closed.