Is The Parking System Financing Plan Contrary To Their By Laws
According to the Community Charter, Section 188-1 clearly spells out that the Council can establish a reserve fund, while Section 189 says that money must be used only for the purpose for which the fund was established.
188 (1) A council may, by bylaw, establish a reserve fund for a specified purpose and direct that money be placed to the credit of the reserve fund.
Use of money in reserve funds
189 (1) Subject to this section, money in a reserve fund, and interest earned on it, must be used only for the purpose for which the fund was established
City Hall will find it difficult to point out that the reserve was established to provide for downtown parking. To confuse the issue, the City’s Financial Sustainability policy says the funds "may" be used for debt repayment. Right now the City’s debt is more than $110 million. So it would appear the plan is akin to taking the money set aside for a payment on the credit card and going out and buying a new car.
By the way, the Community Charter also has something to say about those who vote in favour of not obeying the rules when it comes to use of such funds:
Liabilities for use of money contrary to Act
A municipal auditor has the power to look at the dealings involved in the taking of the money from the reserve fund and unless City Hall can come up with an explanation suitable to the shareholders of the community, the auditor should be called to look into the issue.
It is difficult for the ordinary citizen to fight city hall because taxpayers are fighting their own money.
Having an Auditor General who can take an impartial look at this questionable practise seems in order.
I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.
Comments
With Empark at CNC they get to collect 100% of all fine money with 0% going to the public institution, and furthermore the parking lot attendants get a bonus for every fine issued.
So now they spend $1.4 million I think I seen in an article last week to put in license plate recognition equipment to ensure the stream lining of the fine process.
Its not about parking space shortage because that’s never been a problem at CNC, but rather its about maximizing revenue streams for the corporation.
Its not about lot maintenance. They get that revenue from the parking fees… the latest is about maximizing profits at the expense of the students.
What could $1.4 million do to help with programs at the college, or additions to the library, or assisting low income students with tuition. No instead it is money that will come from students to finance a for profit corporation with its regressive taxation of post secondary opportunity… or the family of the sick at the hospitals.
What’s really sick was when my son was deathly ill in the hospitals and after a very stressful day we got a ticket and the stupid ticket, our ticket wasn’t expired till the next day and also my mother in law got a ticket and again wasn expired till the next day. That added stress could have been avoided if the dumb ass wouldn’t be so greedy about getting his bonus. So when I went to impark in Cnc I should the ticket to her and my stubb that still wasn’t expired and she ripped it up and told me this is the only time we will do this for. WHAT. So that’s my experience with impark. Sickening.
What City Staff is recommending to Council seems like poor advice. At worst it’s illegal, and at best, it a back door approach to bring in a very unpopular measure without the consent of the people.
The only problem with the parking downtown is that the people of Prince George don’t want pay parking.
This isn’t the sort of thing you’d expect a council to do just before an election–they’re just creating fodder to get themselves kicked out of office next year.
^^^^ This council will not listen to anyone that is not the “Professional” it has been shown time and time again. In fact one of the councillors stated that fact and is on the city website.
The back door approach without the consent of the people? – It happens only for the people with vested interest – payback time.
The writing is on the wall when the mayor and council would not even look at their own stats from their own website. Was it not the mayor that said – how do we know it was not one person entering the questionaire?
When neighbourhoods are against 95 % of something – leave it alone.
It took a ARP – a legal process to stop the dyke. – don’t kid yourself if you think that or the PAC is over.
When do their own departments such as planning and bylaws even follow the bylaws or the OCP?
As a taxpayer – I sure would like to see the amount we pay in legal costs due to incompetence of a selected few.
If I remember correctly, years ago the City added $ to our taxes so that they could pay down the debt. I would like to see where that money has gone as the debt repayment reserve fund should be zero out each year as they pay down the debt. And we know that they have not done that.
Thank you Ben and Debbie for bringing up the illegality of taking the money for the Debt Repayment Reserve Fund. Now it is up to us to put the pressure on City Hall that we know they can not do that.
You would think that Councillors would know this stuff especially the Lawyer Wilbur who often backs his decisions and rationale on matters using legal jargon. No legal views being presented by council to support this proposed mis use of public funds. Hopefully the majority of council will come to their senses and vote against this on Sept 23rd
Comments for this article are closed.