Great price of work! Let’s see if the council has the balls to do what needs to done!

Brian Skakun won’t want to eliminate fluoride. Brian loves fluoride!

I love the pothole lottery idea.

You have got to be kidding….

Someone there must be on the board of ipg. Cutting back councilors good move. All I can say us wtf did we pay 350000 for this crap.

I do not understand why KPMG and the Core Review Committee includes such items as “determining the process to decrease the number of Councillors from 8 to 6 in a list of items suggested for “study”.

Why are they are making a federal case of things that anyone who is a Councillor or senior administrator ought to know, and even municipal experts who are making recommendations of how to run this city ought to know.

It comes straight from the Community Charter. Here is a shortened version of key points.

118 (1) Unless otherwise provided by letters patent or by a bylaw under this section, the council size for municipalities must be as follows:

(a) for a city or district having a population of more than 50 000, the council is to consist of a mayor and 8 councillors;

(3) A council may, by bylaw, establish the number of council members as a mayor and 4, 6, 8 or 10 councillors.

(4) If a bylaw under subsection (3) would

(a) reduce the number of council members, or

(b) maintain the current number of council members, despite an increase that would otherwise result under subsection (2),
it may only be adopted if it receives the assent of the electors.

(5) A bylaw under subsection (3)
(a) must be made at least 6 months before the next general local election, and

(b) does not become effective until that general local election.

(6) The size of council as established under subsection (3) applies despite any provision of a municipality’s letters patent.
——————————————

So let us say Council wants to reduce its numbers to 6 + 1 mayor, here are the steps.

If they want it to take effect at the 2014 election

1.Conduct a plebiscite sometime in 2013

2. If approved, enact the bylaw no later than say March 2014

3.If not approved, consider better promotion for Council’s position and trying again if the vote was close.

4.If the bylaw is in place on time, run an election in 2014 with 6 Councillor positions.

If Council does not wish to spend the additional money to conduct a mid term plebiscite, then the vote would take place during the 2014 election and, if successful, the reduced seats will take place during the 2017 election.

This core review is really an amateur show. When will the real review take place?

So Prince George will be the only city in the province that fluoridates it’s water? You have to ask yourself why?

Looks like all they can come up with is contract it out.

An interesting matter to consider when looking at the expense of Councillors.

We have a city of something like 72,000 according to the 2011 census. We have 9 people representing those folks.

We have a regional district of something like 90,0000 with 14 Directors, 4 of which are from PG.

We are paying taxes to the Regional Ditrict and Councillors on the RD get extra pay for sitting on the Board.

Should we not also look at reducing those numbers – three Councillors and redistribute the electoral districts to reduce the number from 14 to say 10 to accommodate the regional nature of the jurisdiction.

I will let someone else research the viability of this under the Charter.

NoWay ….. what is missing in all those points is a justification for cutting and not cutting.

The other thing that is missing so far are iems that are being considered but have not been implemented yet, such as a PAC. Those types of projects have to be considered.

Also proposals such as Smart Growth on the Ground ideas like buying the Days Inn, tearing it down, and building a pond on that site for row boats and swans. ;-)

I mean, when one looks at the stuff that has been done by people in their free thinking exercises, this core review fits right in there.

It would be funny if it were not so expensive an exercise.

Value for money is still nowhere to be seen at this late stage.

The Four Seasons pool thing.

That pool ios reaching the end of its lifetime. I do not know why anyone would wish to operate it.

There is no new idea generation capability on the Committee or with the KPMG group.

Want to increase the capacity of the Civic Centre to generate some money and activity and do it in private public partnership?

Just an idea.

1. tear down the pool and replace it in conjunction with the Y at their location.

2. Build a Hotel plus a conference hall doubling as a live performance theatre on that site and connect it to the Civic Centre to increase the convention capacity. Explore various operating options to suit both the City and the Convention Hotel operators.

I put that out there not as a fixed solution to be implemented as much as a recognition that the entire Civic Plaza is dysfunctional and needs some imaginative and realistic ideas to improve it to become a viable, active, heart of the City.

It has not become what it was planned to be following the initial construction of the Library. The two buildings which follwed completely disregarded any integrative planning which should have brought commercial space into the area. Instead they became icons to the designers.

There is one proviso to a suggestion of expanding the convention capacity downtown. Find out what Majors is doing before anyone spends money and duplicates efforts.

I see no talk about the arena downtown yet. That won’t last forever either. It can be prime property, although it is limited due to the shadow effect of the hill.

Did anyone mention investing in a quality planning department?

I can see there is a potential for some big savings there, especially with the fire approach, millions could be saved annually, but can they execute — that is the question.

Also, I’d just like to roll my eyes and say that retired people should find hobbies or jobs, because that have entirely too much time on their hands to sit and B____ about EVERYTHING that is wrong in all their infinite wisdom. Good Grief.

I get a real kick out of seeing the recommendation for a private group to operate the Four Seasons pool ;-).

I can only imagine what the heating bill on a big pool would be. I’ll bet it’s pretty high!

Wait, this building is on the district heating system which means that it costs twice as much as using natural gas would to heat the building and water.

I wonder what a private operator would decide to do?

A couple of things:
Do we need 2 fire trucks at every litle fender bender that happens on the streets. I’m glad that they are there to repsond but it seems excessive that you get 2 RCMP cruisers, 2 ambulances and a full compliment of fire trucks for a fender bender. Not always but I think it happens enought to comment.
I was born and raised in Winnipeg and even with all of the city owned pools, we swam at the “Y”. I think the local “Y” should be taking it over and running it to provide swimming lessons and water safety as well as a place to exercise.

I think the Y is the most prolific operator of Aquatic Centres in Canada and likely in the USA.

Here is one in Sudbury. There are many others.

I do not know if they would be interested in operating away from their main facility in town, or even operate a pool which is nearing the end of its life. That pool is over 40 years old. As someone who is very knowledgeable about buildings once said to me when he saw the building for the first time “that building looks tired.”

The question I have, why only the four seasons pool? Why not the other one as well?

http://www.ncaquatics.com/recent.htm

http://www.google.ca/search?q=ymca+pools&hl=en&rlz=1T4GGNI_enCA475CA475&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=COpZUNLLE-72iQLWqYD4Bg&ved=0CC0QsAQ&biw=1041&bih=548

Did I ever mention on here that I don’t go on facebook because there are too many people on there with nothing better to do in their lives than gossip? There ought to be a law …. :-)

Was surprised to see fire hall manning in the recommendations as i thought protective services were not included in this review.

On the Don’t Do list the one item sticks out like a sore thumb is fluoride. I know it has been brought up here ad nauseam but the 300k a year spent should be looked at and continued use justified.

As for the quality planning department, you might have to wait until next year at this time to see the seeds planted gus. The new city manager will have been in place for a month or so and is just starting to get the lay of the land(someone should let him/her know about O250 so they get an unfiltered view of things;) Will have had a few meeting with department heads and with any luck the gaps are becoming painfully obvious.

“that building looks tired.” I wonder if the same people who maintained the current RCMP building into the ground look after the pool:0

Was at a Roman pool in Bath last year that was a LOT older than 40 years and it still looked fine.I think the Romans contracted out the maintenance:D

[url]http://romanbaths.co.uk/[/url}

http://romanbaths.co.uk/ oops

There are actually cities which have web sites for those people who take an interest in city developments, discuss them, post pictures of developments, and generally enhance information available in their community far beyond what is provided by those organizations both public and private that get paid for doing such work.

The amount of “volunteer” time spent by people interested in their communities in phenomenal when one thinks about it.

http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php?t=1414

If the world is your scene, here is a better one for those interested ….

http://www.skyscrapercity.com

Here is the northern BC page. http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=196132&page=12

Here is the Kamloops page
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=272213&page=191

In case those who might go to those links don’t notice, there are 12 pages for PG and the north and 191 for Kamloops. If one wants a vibrant city, on has to put some effort and care into nurturing it. Growing a community cannot be left to anyone other than its citizens, some of whom care with each finding their own little niche based on their interests.

It is strange how that works … :-)

I think the Romans used “guest workers” even then. ;-)

Did we seriously just spend $350 000 for an hour worth of brainstorming? A 13 year old could have came out with this list. Our city leaders are delusional, We could have paved another street with that money and got a high school politics class to produce that for free.

gus wrote:”Find out what Majors is doing before anyone spends money and duplicates efforts.”

Should find out what Marshall Smith is doing at the Y also.

I thought the local Y wanted a pool years ago – was there not a survey put out a few years ago?

the RCMP are going to use the university for their research. Good question, why they did not look at UNBC. The city used UNBC on a number of things….

There are a number of ideas which are in the “Don’t Do” category on this draft document, meaning information already gathered by KPMG suggests following through with any of these suggestions would be a bad idea, including:

It appears we are looking after our “own”.IPG should be one of the first to go. It’s a waste of our tax dollars and don’t increase corporate taxes. This would be the death knell of our Mayor. Where else could she get $80,000.00 bucks to win the next election. Corporations are the only source of funds that are keeping the liberals alive in BC.

The Core review is nothing more then a “hatchet man” for a City that dosent nave tne balls to do what needs to be done.

Notice that the “contracting out” is the magic wand that will solve all the Cities ills. They will be feeding the private sector. When in fact tney should be looking at management. Wy not contract out say tne planoing dep[artment or acconting where people sit around all day just trying to keep looking “busy”.

Maybe they could shut down City Hall and contract out the entire management of the City
Cheers

Funny, some of the ideas that I would most like to see explored are on the Don’t Do list. For example, I’m not an anti-fluoride advocate by any means, but the reality is that most city water gets flushed down the toilet and watered onto lawns or driveways. Even if one accepts that fluoride is necessary for dental health, an discussion I am choosing not to engage in here, flurodiating all of our water is an ineffective way of getting fluroide to the public. Let’s scrap it and use the money for things that obviously beneficial.

I’d also be interested in exploring the IPG funding. What has it accomplished, and is it really necessary? If not, let city admin do any work that is deemed essential.

8. Establish a charge for plowing of windrows across driveways (This idea reappears as some thing that should be eliminated all together in 2-5 years.)
Yes indeed, let us eliminate the one service most homeowners truly appreciate… Geez if this goes forward I can’t wait for the snows like we had in the mid to late 70’s to bring this into perspective… Nothing like having to be somewhere in ten minutes and three grader blades of ice and snow have you blocked in…

and the Don’t do list…
There’s a Northern Lights Festival?

I wish I had the time to do a core review on the core review. I am opposed to almost everything I hear from them to this point. Especially the idea of keeping IPG.

IMO its a report by and for the insider developers for their agenda only… subsidized by the public.

So for $350,000, they have basically come up with:

– Reduce service levels, sell off major city assets and start competing with 10 year old kids when it comes to shovelling driveways for a nominal fee.

Awesome!

Someone please tell me what our tax dollars will go for then?

*if we axe decent paying jobs that support over financially burdened students (those good summer jobs are all but gone already) and heads of families to instead invest in the profit margin of private enterprise; overburden further the non profits that are the grease of the wheels in this town as they currently provide sports/education/arts/community celebration programs and opportunities for a FRACTION of what any one else could; cut services such as end of driveway clearing (our snow removal system was once the marvel of the world), again – overburden families and citizens with increased fees to the good ole pool (who hasn’t spent an enormous amount of time there, as a kid?).

BUT keep shelling out a cool mill for IPG, an organization that to this day cannot demonstrate community need, sustainability or any such ROI, protect corporations from paying their fair share, etc. etc.

“IMO its a report by and for the insider developers for their agenda only… subsidized by the public”. bang on, Eagleone.

I demand that my tax dollars support public programs, services and amenities which prove direct benefit to the broadest of my fellow citizens. Keep business, corporations & private for gain agendas out of my taxpayer’s dollars envelope. If your business plan is sound, attract investors with their own damn money and sell me on it as the end user consumer.

If we allow all this contracting out & sweet deal handouts, IMO that is what it will amount to, with our assets we can never go back and it will just be the beginning.

Your tax dollars will not decrease, folks, and we will continue to pay either way; you need to decide whom and what they will benefit as part of the larger picture.

Properly done an organization like IPG can be a great benefit for the city,getting the word out of what Prince George has to offer and attracting investment. They can also help grease the wheels to make the process of setting up here easier by guiding through all the red tape.

Where they have gone off the rails is by making the main focus the downtown core. The central business has more than enough people beating the drum on their behalf,MyPG, DIBA, SGOTG, CC Prospectus, etc,etc.

Spending a while on their website it is hard to see exactly what they are currently up to or how many irons they might have in the fire.

This office was moved out of city hall for good reason, to remove it one more step from political influence(read mayor and council sticking their nose in.) Have the board direct IPG to once again be a regional development office and see what they can do before shutting the doors.

I wonder if the largest landholder in the core received their assessment and have realized that their holding are worth a lot less than what they paid, hence the OCD with downtown.

BTW, it was announced on CBC today that the “rich are getting even richer…still”, with the gist of it being that the wealthiest among us (may have pertained to the US only, or North America combined, I can’t recall)seeing their net worth climb again this year, by almost 14%. How can that happen when the rest of us are sliding or barely hanging on in one of the worst world economies seen to date?

Someone who saw the draft report said there was a note that the Mayor is being appointed to the board of IPG. Huh, when did that deal take place? Behind closed doors perhaps.

and why is the city in the economic development business anyway when traditionally it has been the responsibility of the Province. Can you say Ministry of Economic Development – Heartland Economic Development Strategy.

And do we really need to be spending 100% more than Kamloops when our economy is driven by resources extraction which is impacted largely by provincial and federal tax policies.

It seems the special interest groups got protected while charities, youth groups and public employees are all targeted for service reductions or fee increases.

Well at least the true agenda of those occupying city hall’s top office is becoming painfully clean.

No mention of selling the Playhouse. This has been a liability to the city for years.

Suggesting reducing two fire halls to two people is not an option in my view. I know what that was like 20 years ago and it put every firefighter in very dangerous situations too often. How do I know? I did it for 18 years in PG.

Selling off City owned property is a good idea. They should not be in the real estate development business with our tax dollars. Use the money to pay down some debt.

Contracting out some of the city work makes sense for the city, but not for the workers who will be affected. When contractors are hired, there are no pensions, no benefit packages etc. to pay for. Costs can be reduced substantially. Only hire them when you need them. Not every position in the city is busy or needed every day. Emergency services is a separate issue.

Having the Y take responsability for the operation of the pool is a good idea. That is what they do.

Reviewing the work load of existing city employees would be a necessary exercise in my opinion. I believe there are qualified people right in city hall who can and should provide the same research that this $350,000 paid to KPMG did.

“I believe there are qualified people right in city hall who can and should provide the same research that this $350,000 paid to KPMG did.”

No doubt, but they would have a biased view. The $350,000 is being paid to get an unbiased view. It may also turn out to be more of an uneducated view than it should have been.

In fact, the bulk of the information came from City departments. The only thing that likely did not is information from other communities which seems to be very limited and sometimes inappropriate from what I have seen.

Basically these people asked questions and compiled the answers into a common format for each functional area.

Basically they have filtered that information through a must, should, may screen.

I have not seen any robust screening which assesses the quality value for money of how PG does a specific function as compared to comparable cities and as compared to what a private corporation might be able to deliver the product/service for. It might still be in the works, but I doubt it since the list which was created to date should have been based on some preliminary information.

I find several of the bins that suggestions have been put in bizzare. They sound more like predetermined responses by the Committee of a “do not go there” mindset.

I like snooping to see what other cities are doing. I know that several people on here do not like that ….. to which I say tuff beans …

So here is a link to a component of the ongoing Thunder Bay Core Business review.
http://ctbpub.thunderbay.ca/ctbapps/nonlinecorprpts.nsf/6bd780898db685b685256afd004bdbb4/e6debb4d5e7de2e3852579870066a6b8?OpenDocument

And here is a paste …. after the cut ….

“The City is facing difficult decisions in 2012 and future years to address its legislated requirements for a balanced budget including addressing an annual infrastructure deficit in the range of $15 – 17 Million”

———————————

And here is Campbell River’s go at it. It was discussed behind closed doors. I am not sure if that meets with the provincial standards.
http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/news/169371776.htm

Here is Mission’s initial report.
http://www.mission.ca/wp-content/uploads/District-of-Mission-Core-Services-Review-Final-Report-July-11-2012.pdf

Just going though some of these gives one an idea how well we are doing.