Opinions Vary On Core Review
Saturday, June 9, 2012 @ 4:14 AM
Prince George, B.C. – A Prince George resident is waving some red flags about the Core Services Review being conducted for the City of Prince George by KPMG.
Glen Nicholson, a lawyer by trade, says he is in no way pre-judging the outcome of the review but wants to tell those conducting it to focus on the infrastructure needs of the city before some of the high-flying goals outlined by the city.
Nicholson says the direction KPMG has been given is based on the goal statement of MyPG while, at the same time, city council has set out a list of priorities or actions that it would like to take this year. But he says those two lists don’t exactly mesh and neither of them has costed anything out. He says “if we were to pursue all the goals on the MyPG list we would certainly be bankrupt.” Nicholson says there is nothing in the MyPG list of goals that says anything about infrastructure. “All I can says is you’ve got to have roads and water and sewer before you can even think about these other goals. In other words, you can’t get to the opera house if you don’t have roads.”
Councilor Cameron Stolz, a member of the City’s Select Committee on the Core Services Review, says “when the terms of reference of the Core Services Review were established, a lot of the work that went into it was making sure that the Core Review was looking at all aspects of the city. And this included looking at 141 different services the City provides, as well as looking at all the policy documents around that, from our Sustainable Finance policy to the MyPG work that’s been done to looking at such programs as the Dare Aware program. We’ve been able to include all of that in the work that’s being done with the Core Review.” Stolz says those 141 services include infrastructure needs. “Correct. That includes water, sewer, storm, roads, and in addition to that it also looks at all the other services that we provide as well.”
Nicholson claims KPMG says it was mandated not to touch policing, with covers roughly 37% of the annual city budget. “It’s the biggest single cost the city has, and the Core Review is not going to look at that?” He also says councilors are telling him, some in writing, that they’re waiting for the Core Review report to come out so that they can deal with the infrastructure problem. He says there’s a hidden message here. “They are number one putting off the problem now until the core review is done. Number two they are assuming that the core review will give them the mandate that they need to fix the infrastructure.”
Councillor Stolz says the Core Services Review isn’t delaying anything. “Nothing is on a hold until the Core Review is done. There are some things that will be answered through the Core Review and we’ll have to wait to see what those results are. As far as making decisions on core infrastructure, we’ll continue to make those decisions as they come up before council.”
Nicholson is also leery of the fact KPMG will be comparing Prince George with other cities. He says “KPMG can do a bang up report of saying here’s an average of what other cities are doing. Prince George is in line with that and is doing a good job, or, Prince George could do a little better in this or that way to be like other cities. If they produce a report like that they will have earned their money because they will have served the mandate they were given. Will it be a good report? No. Will it be a creative report? No. Will it solve our problems? No. But it will placate those who have commissioned the report by saying we’re doing a pretty good job and we just need to adjust a couple of things and carry on as before. And so KPMG gets paid, Shari Green says she has fulfilled her mandate of doing a core review, and city council can hide behind the review and say we’re following it.”
Comments
Wow. That’s a horrible “news” article. Nicholsons comments belong in the blog section. Silliest part: “Nicholson is not pre judging the core report”, then the rest of the article contains his pre-judgements!
I never met the man but have heard him spoken of highly. He is voicing my thoughts on the core review. I actually find it quite amazing that not one of our newly elected officials have found any cost saving measures.
The core review should focus what is happening today not through some pie in the sky vision of what the city will look like in 40 years.
Basic questions, is the city spending wisely? are we getting full value?are staffing levels correct?who would be best fit as new city manager?
If the MYPG website is any indication of how the project is proceeding, IMO it is in the same condition as our roads. Ripe with outdated information, dead links and poor design….potholes on the information superhighway if you will;)
From the mayor and council’s list of Priority Projects, page 11 of the Strategic Plan:
“In 2010:
⢠The City will develop a strategy to close the funding gap for road rehabilitation and
address it through the annual budget process.”
Just in case they need an update….we are half way through 2012…..any progress to report from the last 30 months FFS?
Maybe it is a case of them not understanding the word Priority….
from the Oxford American Dictionary
priority n 1.being earlier or more important, precedence in rank etc.,the right to be first. 2.something that is more important than other items or considerations,has got his priorities wrong.
You’re welcome Shari et al., I hope it helps.
Buzz …. believe it or not, but this site is a news blog. So Nicholson happens to be in the right part of the internet by your assessment.
Can you tell the difference between a pre-judgement and a scenario? Nicholson is setting out a possible as well as plausible scenario. For this community actually, a VERY plausible scanario which we have to be rather careful of, in my opinion.
I have said it before on here, $350,000 is not a vast amount of money when looking at what the expectations of some people appear to be. Thsi is an audit, unlike any audit that was ever done of this City’s operations. To think that some services will not be scrutinized more than others, when there is not enough money to audit them all, is plain unrealiastic. When that is the case, it is especially important to make sure that the auditors are not steered in a direction that an unrelated party would steer them into.
And to think that he who pays the piper in this case is unrelated is childish. As auditors, KPMG need to be the sole judge of how they audit. It is only because there is limtied money, that the City will likely be involved in providing some guidance into what direction that audit will head.
There is, however, an important matter I take issue with in the article. The protective services takes up over 30% of the City’s operating budget. That includes policing and fire.
What I am uncertain of at this stage if both are not going to be audited or whether it is just policing. In my view we need to make certain that fire is covered since it is a key service and one which takes up a significant c ompnent of the budget. It is, however, one which will take a bit more expertise, in my opinion, than KPMG may be able to provide for the money they are being paid.
This month KPMG is scheduled to come out into the public’s lens. It is important that all of us who have the capacity to deal with such topics in a meaningful and objective way come out and do our part.
Buzz, I do not think you are up to it. Yous seem to have a vested interest in perpetuating ignorance.
My apologies. In rereading my post the sentence below turned out in the opposite direction it was meant to head.
“it is especially important to make sure that the auditors are not steered in a direction that an unrelated party would steer them into.”
Should read: “it is especially important to make sure that the auditors are steered in a direction that an unrelated party would steer them into.
A Freudian slip, if I ever saw one … LOL
I expect this city to be self-auditing all the time, 24-7-365! When children are growing up parents audit their behaviour and give direction. When children become adults they do their own auditing on themselves! That’s what I have to do (without the help of KPMG) to make sure I have the funds to pay annual 3 grand I must pay to the city for taxes and fees!
Doesn’t the city have enough adult staff (700 employees) to continuously self-audit and self-monitor its priorities and spending habits?
The city has all the necessary departments to monitor that short term and long term goals are being met from day to day and year to year!
Why must everything be allowed to go off the rails first before professional help is called in?
The city provides 141 different services? What are they? Perhaps they are too many? Perhaps the city shouldn’t be involved in them? Perhaps they can be contracted out or set free to look after themselves – as they did when cities didn’t have grants available for anybody who managed to tearfully plead a case?
I fully agree with Mr. Nicholson! A big shake-up may be needed.
Most politicians main focus is to do whats right for business, not for the people that elect them. Don’t expect anything from this core review that will take away from the future financial benefit of business.
It’s called Honesty and integrity, something that politicians,mayors,councilors and the government as a whole are lacking.
All for one and the big pay cheque with all the perks. Forgetting that good honest people elected you in hopes that you have the integrity to do the right thing with tax payers dollars. Such as infrastructure and roads, something that is used commonly by all.
This is what should come first and foremost.
Gus,
I don’t know for certain, but I believe I heard that both fire and policing is excluded from the review. I can’t seem to find an in-depth scope document on the core services review. Personally, I find this quite telling of what a sham this whole process is and how likely it will be to bear any fruit whatsoever.
If nothing else, they should look at how we do fire protection. Most cities pay a fraction of what we pay for that, because most cities employ a combination of volunteer and staff firefighters. Quesnel for instance, if memory serves, has 1/3 the population Prince George does and their 2011 fire budget was $1 million dollars I believe. They can do this, because I think over half of the firefighters are volunteers. This is compared to the over $16 million dollars that we paid in 2011. That doesn’t take any special expertise to examine that. Just someone who can use some common sense, restructure the department to maintain a sufficient compliment to cover actual structure fires and have volunteers for support. Oh yes, and stop the redundant practice of showing up to ambulance calls, when most of them don’t have the necessary training and skill in those situations anyway. It’s a waste of time and money and exposes the City to unnecessary liability.
(Taxpayers only have so much to give. Check out this story from the United States)
SAN DIEGO (AP) Decisive victories for ballot proposals cutting retirement benefits for government workers in two of the largest cities in the U.S. emboldened advocates seeking to curb pensions in state capitols and city halls across the nation.
The voter responses in San Diego and San Jose were stinging setbacks for public employee unions, which also came up short on Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s recall victory in Wisconsin.
“The message is that if elected officials and public employee unions do not responsibly deal with this issue, voters will take things into their own hands,” said Thom Reilly, former chief executive of Clark County, Nev., now a professor of social work at San Diego State University. “We could see more draconian measures from citizens.”
In San Diego, two-thirds of voters favored the pension reduction plan. And the landslide was even greater in San Jose, where 70 percent were in favor.
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, a chief backer, said he was surprised by the margin of victory and considered it a statement that voters won’t tolerate benefits that are more generous than those they receive working at private companies.
“It just shows the frustration people have with pension benefits that are out of control and taking away from city services,” he said in an interview Wednesday.
California pension cuts may have ripple effect
http://www.stardem.com/article_79d33f53-65a5-580e-b7a7-1dc2b2e9af0d.html
Charles,
Were you always this petty, or did you learn it from someone?
I’m not a union person myself, but I certainly don’t wish people ill that have been able to acquire a job that comes with benefits and a living wage.
The movement of production offshore to developing countries has pretty much destroyed labour unions. There will come a time when they’re gone, and that won’t serve your interests, even if you don’t realize it. It never ceases to amaze me at how the common man can barely see beyond his own navel and see the bigger picture. To how labour unions have raised working standards not just for unionized workers, but for non-unionized labour as well.
I think it’s sad, that you would take pleasure in their benefits being gouged, which would require government to illegally violate a contract it signed by the way, just so you don’t feel so alone in your material poverty and diminished spirit. Grow up and get a life.
The Core Reveiw should look at everything, and I mean everything. Citizens should also ensure that they have their input.
If we get nothing out of this Core Reveiw, except more Government hyperbole, then we have to go to a Citizens/Taxpayers reform group, and force these people to take the right action.
We cannot continue to fund all the various benefits, and wages of the different levels of Government at a huge cost to ourselves, while we dont have anything near the benefits our Civil Servants do. That is basically insane. Its time to re-wind the clock and start over.
Government workers and politicians work for the taxpayers, and do not deserve anymore compensation that other members of the community. We have an out of control situation here, that has been going on for years and has to stop.
One does not even want to start on all the bad decisions that have been made over the years that have cost us millions and millions of dollars.
An excerpt from Charles post above.
“voters won’t tolerate benefits that are more generous than those they receive working at private companies.”
These voters gotta be burger flippers and the like.
“One does not even want to start on all the bad decisions that have been made over the years that have cost us millions and millions of dollars.”
One should start on it. Thats where the real problems exist, not in ones wages and benefits.
Mismanagement of taxpayer money is the real issue that needs to be addressed.
“Government workers and politicians work for the taxpayers,…”
Since when did they start working?
;-)
“Government workers and politicians work for the taxpayers,…”
Therein lies the rub …..
I have always thought that when one works for someone, the individual who does the working gets direction from the person they are working for. If that direction is clear, and the worker is conscientious and capable of doing the work, then one has a great team and there can be great things accomplished.
In order for that to work properly, a relatively clear and continuous feedback loop is required.
I find that the major thing we are missing in PG and probably many other places, is a broken down or even non-existent feedback loop other than an election process on a three year cycle.
How many places are there in the normal business world that accept a three year feedback loop?
In the years between elections it is normally the media that holds the taxpayers proxy in holding our elected officials accountable.
The problem lies when the mayor has an underling phone a media outlet to inform them they are no longer on speaking terms with the mayors office or a councillor hangs up when asked a legitimate question that might have been a little uncomfortable for him.
As for the contract with city workers, the time has come to remove things like the no lay-off clause or the workforce should be downsized so that “make work” projects are kept to an absolute minimum. When workload increases part time, casual or heaven forbid contract workers can be called in. The city’s workforce has grown while the population has shrunk, time for a haircut in both hourly and management ranks.
Picking up on what you wrote, lonesome sparrrow, the feedback loop is broken by the mayor and Stolz in those instances.
I believe strongly that those who break the feedback loop are not carrying out their duties of accountability and transparency.
Comments for this article are closed.