Ben, what the mayor said was pthey got some money from the government. But since it didn’t come out of the local coffers she doesn’t think it counts as an expense. She doesn’t seem to realize that it was still all paid for by tax dollars. She thinks…wait, no she doesn’t.

I am ready to buy the mayor a one way ticket half way around the world…one string…when she gets there she has to stay there….

I would pitch in for the ticket…

Would someone please explain to me how these trips to China benefit the city?

I know China owns a good portion of the resource companies in Canada but they probably have offices in Vancouver or Calgary.

Mr Meisner
This is what Shari Greens response to your question is.

And while she’s happy to boast about her city, Green said it “astounds” her as to why there are so many naysayers within the community.

“If it’s such a terrible place, surely there must greener pastures somewhere for them. There’s a lot of people who love living here and those are the people that I’m more than happy to spend my time working with to make our community better,” she said. “I don’t think we can afford to let this economic opportunity that’s happening all around us go by. And when we continue to battle within our own home, within our own community, over what’s best it doesn’t serve any of us. The outside world will watch us and judge us.”

NoWay, crime is good or at least it pays, the VLA streets are plow after every snow fall. The excuses so that emergency vehicles can have accesse

I have defended Ms. Green on occasion, but I can’t defend this silly ‘twinning initiative’ which nobody at the City can explain what the benefit is to taxpayers other than offering vague platitudes.

If this is what going to China is about, then it should be stopped immediately.

JohnnyBelt. Riverside Calif twinned with Jiangmen China in 1996. If you look up this twinning you will see what they have accomplished since then (which is very little), Riverside and the Americans seem to have more of an association with Jiangmen than we ever will.

These twinning arrangements are usually nothing more than **feel good** situations, and allows politicians to get in some free travel.

We have ‘twinned’ before, in fact we have 3 other sister cities in China. One is still in the MOU position so it would seem we have abandoned those, any reason why?

What it appears to have caught their eye this time is our taxpayer subsidized university

Do any of these mayors give a s@#t about the day to day running of the city? Or is she just trying to blow money faster on dumber things than her buddy Dan Rogers? When is her term up anyhow? I agree with gitterdun and JohnnyBelt, she needs to be stopped immediately.

As Ben pointed out, regardless of what the Mayor’s expense statement says, tax dollars from a different ‘bucket’ paid for this trip as well.

It’s all a shell game, and the taxpayers are on the hook for the full amount regardless of the source of tax money.

We are now officially into the Municipal Election year. So we can expect announcements of good things to come.

The question is who will run for office, and who will run for the hills??

On the surface is seems that this Mayor and Council’s first two years were a disaster, and they have alienated a large group of voters. Can they right the ship before November?? Who knows??

Don’t confuse huh? with huh… :)
Now I hear she doesn’t know if she will be running in the next municipal election (is anyone surprised?) but rather she has been “approached” (by who? I do not know) about running in the federal election. Seriously? She doesn’t hope to represent this region, surely.

If she runs for the Tories, at least it will be easy to vote against her.

An excellent Travel agent has the ability and care “to understand you and your needs”
They are also required to be transparent and include all costs to client

I don’t think she would be a good fit for the job at all

Happened to stumble upon an interview with her and CTV (I think it was CTV) but when she insisted that the Core Review had produced great results and benefits for the City and the taxpayers I used my remote. She blamed any public negativity on misunderstanding and misinformation prevailing in the community.

So whoever puts two and two together and dares to question is either misinformed or does not understand or both!

Gee, I feel soooooo inadequate – NOT!

30 Km times $.36 is $10.80 not $13.68

@Gruntled: That’s a ’38’, not a ’30’.

That’s super funny Gruntled. No wonder the budget does not work well in PG. Shari will be remember as on special kind of mayor.

If Ms Green doesn’t like the naysayers in PG..she could always move!as she so nicely suggested about us….since she is the or at least one of our major complaints.

if one third of her salary is tax free as it is assumed to be for “expenses”, why does she also get to put in an extra expense form? Isn’t that double dipping?

Maybe the tax auditors at the CRA should be checking into this rather than hounding honest working people.

Obviously the head honcho at IPG decided to “take care” of her friends at city hall and cover most of the expenses for the mayor and city manager.

The answer as to what the true expenses were for this latest junket to china could be answered with a simple freedom of information request to IPG. Or maybe they don’t talk to opinion 250 either.

@JohnnyBelt….my mistake…can only read my own chicken scratch

Clearly she has been getting spin lessons from Ms James. Saw the interview on CKPG, amazing how she spins the “spending craze” on the union, saying that the public’s lack of trust in her and counsel’s leadership comes down to spending and expenses. Well yeah Ms Green it comes down to your reckless spending on crap the city doesn’t need. This has nothing to do with CUPE wages and everything to do with dykes, outrageous police castles and other ridiculous spending over and above the operation of the city.

Why do we need to spend almost $500,000.00 on communications people, speak up I can hear you just fine. They cleared a lot of folks out of the 5th floor (Ms James the happy hatchet), maybe there is more to be saved in clearing out more from management. Clearly they are not doing there jobs, cause they aren’t needed any longer. How about the outrageous bill for the labour lawyer, the investigators that were brought up to watch the pickers, what’s that costing us?

What a joke……

City hall is Grossly mismanaged by Beth James and Shari Green, they are both trying to “make their bones” so to speak with an eye on Provincial politics….all at the expense of the City of PG citizens and workers.

I am not sure what the expense claim form is supposed to tell us.

It tells me that:

1. that the City pays a very low mileage rate of $0.36/km when most government related organization are accepting about $0.52 these days.

2. that she had to pay for her own meals less than half the time – the rest were covered by either PG/BC or the hosts (which is the norm for formal meals with the host country.

3. That she likely had some additional room expenses for movies, drinks, or other personal services not covered by BC/City/hosts.

4. that she advanced those miscellaneous funds and claimed them after the fact.

Pretty normal stuff there ……

Beth James is doing exactly what she is being paid to do. It is not her job to be sweethearts with the City’s work force, as previous City managers have. She’s just getting started and good for her.

I agree gus, there is nothing outlandish about the claim itself, just the purpose.

Seems certain people credit James with doing what she was hired to do, however they never seem to give us any specifics.

Just what has she done since she got here??

The parking contract was voted down.

They will re visit the off street parking, and parkade issue this Monday with a view to making some radical changes.

She laid off a few people, and then hired some communication people.

She is responsible to some extent for the failing contract talks that are really nothing more than an effort to get zero, and zero, in 2013, 2014, and then sell out (in my opinion) for 2015, 2016.

Is she responsible for bringing in the Storm Water levy?? This is another ill conceived cash grab, that hopefully will never see the light of day,.

Is she responsible for the Code of Conduct for Councilors, that at best will impede them (and perhaps the general public) when they try to get information?? Never understood why the Councilors would pass this code of conduct, when its basically covered in other areas.

Seems most things that administration have tried to push through fell flat on its arse, and I suspect that, that is exactly what will happened with Ms: James.

A reminder from the City web site of how things worked.

The Select Committee on Core Services Review was created by Council to oversee the work of a core service review.

The core services review will be delivered by KPMG, an independent consultant selected through a competitive bid process to examine the services provided by the City of Prince George and offer recommendations concerning program/service mandates, and opportunities for expense reduction, revenue diversification and operational efficiency.

Members
1. Mayor Green (Chair)
2. Councillor Everitt
3. Councillor Koehler
4. Councillor Stolz

The role of Administration was to provide base data for the work of KPMG and the Select Committee.

The final decision maker in the process was the full Council.

During most of that process the City Manager was Soltis, not James.

Irrespective of that, neither had decision making input.

So, KPMG …. plus Green, Everitt, Koehler, and Stolz are the ones to blame in a large part since they watched and directed the recommendations as they were prepared, plus the full Council for the final decision.

So the Core Services Review Implementation Plan included the following items:

3.24 On-Street Parking That Council direct Administration to return a bylaw to implement on-street pay parking downtown with rates of no less than $1.00 per hour effective January 1, 2014. $350/year increased net revenue

3.25 Off-Street Parking – That Council direct Administration to return a bylaw increasing off-street parking rates, as set out in Subsection 3.25, Table 2, effective January 1, 2014. $230/year increased net revenue.

3.24 was shot down by Council after lobbying from local organizations

3.25 was accepted by Council who did not get the same response from organizations, but got it from users of the facilities after the fact.

So now a few figure they have made a mistake. To me they obviously have no feel for user perceptions. They really should not be sitting at the Council table.

James had nothing to do with this both because she was not there for the start and she did not have meaningful standing in the process.

I can make similar arguments for the rest of the false accusations you make.