What is so different about a huge sudden increase in parking, when they had no qualms about a huge sudden increase in giving themselves a raise? Maybe now they’re looking for ways to fund it!

Three individuals who want to be re-elected- no other reason; the pay is good!

There are three things that the two previous posters forget about the raise to Councillors:

1. The raise was based on an independent review headed by Dave Yarmish which indicated that our City Councillors were paid considerably less than City Councillors in BC, but that the Mayor was receiving more than most Mayors in BC.

2. The recommendations to raise Councillors’ pay, but not the Mayor’s pay, were accepted by a vote of the previous Council, not the current Council

3. Two of the Councillors who are bringing forward the notice of motion tonight were not on Council at the time the vote to raise Councillors’ compensation was taken.

Furthermore, what is more important with respect to the above report:

1. The raise to Councillors was not 100% more.

2. Apparently Councillors were not aware that the increase to the offstreet parking rates were to be immediate rather than in staged increments.

1. Who cares what other councillors in it other towns/ cites make. The rest of us don’t get raises by comparing what the same jobs in other cities make.

2. It was only a recommendation

3.who cares.

4. The raise was still substantial comparing it to anyone else’s raise.. Was about 28% if memory serves.

5 if the councillors where not aware of the increase then they aren’t doing their jobs and don’t deserve a raise.

“The rest of us don’t get raises by comparing what the same jobs in other cities make.”

Precisely! This comparing and attempting to get even and perhaps trying to surpass others is called leapfrogging.

Nice for those who are holding the purse strings.

Councillors don’t make much money for what they do and the scrutiny they have to face. If it was that easy, all the experts from the comment section of this site would be doing it.

PVal “Who cares what other councillors in it other towns/ cites make. The rest of us don’t get raises by comparing what the same jobs in other cities make.”

Wow, are you ever naieve. Of course the rates in the market are set by what people in other communities make. If one makes a substantial amount less here, say more than 10%, for a similar job here as in Kamloops or Penticton, or Nanaimo, people would not be coming here or staying here other than those who have lesser qualifications.

“if the councillors where not aware of the increase then they aren’t doing their jobs and don’t deserve a raise.”

Have you ever considered that this is really micromanaging? Quality staff, including the City Manager, should be a bit more sensitive as to how to implement change.

Only an inexperienced person or staff would make a change in the fashion that staff did.

Prince George, leapfrogging happened when he Mayor was given a substantial raise a few years back. I think one has to go to Kinsley, if I recall correctly, to see leapfrogging.

BTW, the current Mayor could have volunteered to take a 10% cut, added to a 10% cut in her office staffing and other expenses to show that her election BS could be achievable in at least some departments.

“The raise was still substantial comparing it to anyone else’s raise.. Was about 28% if memory serves.”

For God’s sake, the % raise is not important. What is important is the final amount of compensation. If the percentage were the important thing, then there will never be a relative change in the actual compensation.

Why are we even bothering to deal with the miniscule pay of Councillors when we should be dealing with the leakage in compensation for staff both from the point of view of the number of staff as well as the pay of staff.

Penticton took a hard look at that, got rid of some positions, put in a new hire wage in some positions and negotiated that into the collective agreement while keeping some staff in those positions while grandfathering their wages.

We learn from others. Our Council/staff seems to be very selective about what they learn from others.

Gus..the % doesn’t matter??oh really, you do live on this planet right! it’s legal medication you are on I hope. Reality is cool.. Come try it some time.

Quoted from the proposed motion: “In some instances the increase is approximately 52%.”

It appears that the 3 Councillors have some math challenges. It is well known that the notion of % is a difficult one for many people to understand.

Here are the actual monthly rate changes for the parkades. The first number is prior to 2014, then the 2014 rate, then the actual $ increase and finally the increase as a percentage of the 2013 rate:

2nd ave$48.66$90.00$41.3485.0%
2nd ave$42.41$90.00$47.59112.2%
2nd ave$37.50$60.00$22.5060.0%
2nd ave$36.43$60.00$23.5764.7%
5th ave$59.82$95.00$35.1858.8%
5th ave$41.95$65.00$23.0554.9%
Plaza$45.00$90.00$45.00100.0%
Plaza$32.50$60.00$27.5084.6%
Westel$61.16$90.00$28.8447.2%
6th ave$80.00$110.00$30.0037.5%

So, the statement in the notice of motion is more correctly presented by the words:” The average increase in the parkades is 70.5% with the highest increase being over a 112% increase.”

While I think that Councillors deserve the increase in pay they received I, for one, expect a commensurate duty of care to go along with that pay raise. That includes, as others have already stated, making sure that you understand what you are voting on, and making sure that you understand the words that you author on your own.

PG is spoiled rotten when it comes to parking, go to any other city in BC this size and your paying for parking, its this “northern” sense of entitelment that annoys me. Whaaaa I want to park my truck as long as I want anywhere I want!! Well Sorry but paying for parking is a reality in Citys. And gus…..retirement must be a joy, 12 comments on this topic and SIX are from you lol, may I suggest you get another hobby beside bit*hing!

When a fellow councilor in other comparable sized cities make an average of $30,000 per year and I make $20,000 and I expect to make similar pay in PG that has a similar workload, I want a $10,000 increase or close to that.

In case you are one of those who does not understand the notion of %, that would mean I am looking at a 50% increase in my compensation.

If all I can get is 3% as an example for what you or others might tolerate, I would get only $20,600.

If you do not understand that, I will be a true Canadian and say I am sorry for your struggle with that simple notion.

“In some instances the increase is approximately 52%.”

Basil Fawlty: “52 is close enough! Whatever you say, don’t mention the 70.5 or the 112% !”

JB:” If it was that easy, all the experts from the comment section of this site would be doing it.”

It is not that easy and since you are the prime expert on this site you may be kind enough to reveal who you are on council.

BTW, many councillors (applies to all communities) do this not because of the monetary rewards but because they actually want to make a contribution to advancement of the community they live in and for other legitimate reasons, like public recognition, having an input on matters for which they have a personal interest and so forth.

Gus..they knew the rate when they took the job..

Have you noticed that making comparisons is always one way and used to get increases.

Rarely do people give any thought to the possibility that other areas are in fact over paid. The thinking is always that other areas rates of pay etc, are correct, and we are out of line, and therefore we should get an increase. This thinking of course is pure BS.

Our Mayor as an example has been paid more than any other Mayors in Cities of similar sizes in BC for over 10/15 years, and never have we heard anyone suggest that we should lower the Mayor salaries to reflect the BC average. Probably the same applies to our high priced City Manager.

To suggest that just because other Cities have to pay for parking we should do the same, is a classic example of comparison that makes no sense. If we can operate a City without the need to gouge people for parking then that’s what we should do. Parking is nothing more than an attempt to gouge taxpayers for more money, etc; The same thing applies to parking at CNC, the Hospital, and UNBC. Nothing more than Government, or Government entities, gouging taxpayers so they have more money available for their pet projects.

Since when did councillor become a money making occupation?

PG you forgot connections and ass kissing for some.

why is it jb that whenever anything involves council upper management ridiculous pay increases or proposals you are a rah rah kind of person but heaven forbid that the man/woman who actually does the real work and might get 1 or 2 percent vs 28 to 50 percent are deemed incorrigible lazy whiners maybe your ignorance will rub off on your dog and he bites you on your keester boy I bet working with you would of been a hoot

This kind of reminds me of what happened when the Musequeam Band got control of their land, and jacked up everyone’s lease in one big fell swoop. The leaseholders called it gouging, and the band pointed out for decades the leaseholders had been getting a great deal, and now it’s time to pay market rates.

I pay for parking, and I don’t like how much I pay, but if that’s how much the city needs to maintain the parking structures, and I’ve been getting a great deal up until now, so be it, I’ll pay and just leave the rates as they are.

But if it’s just a transfer of wealth from me, by overcharging for parking, to a different account like FUTURE PAC, then I’m not so happy.

What I find outrageous is the millions being spent to change the on street parking. Where is the public outrage there?

We are a city with a $100 million in debt… more than any other city in BC outside of Vancouver. Interest rates are going to go up and so will property taxes to pay the interest on this debt… and we have $8 million to change the configuration of parking on 4th Avenue? Can’t it wait a few years until the city has its debt problems under control?

Good luck going bankrupt city of PG.

P Val: “Gus..they knew the rate when they took the job.”

So what is it that you are trying to say? Of course they knew the rate because it had been voted on and passed before they took office. If you read my posts and you were to confirm them by doing something you seem to be incapable of, going back to reports on 250NEWS or the City Council minutes of late 2011 to find out for yourself, you would possibly be able to understand.

However, with every post I am more and more starting to think that you may have a bit of a weakness in the processing of information department.

Over and out.

I agree 100% with you Eagleone!!!

They seem to be totally incapable to going back to square one in determining priorities. I thought maybe the core review process would have taught them how to do that. But hey, wishful thinking, eh?

The questions I have about that issue are these:

1. how many parking spaces do we have now on a street that is supposed to be switched?

2. how many additional parking spaces will be provided?

3. what is the total cost of the changeover done on the pretense that it is for parking?

4. divide that cost by the number of additional parking spaces to identify the cost of each new parking space.

5. compare that to the cost per parking stall of paving one of the properties the city owns to provide off street parking (keeping in mind that the value of the property would likely be retained for future sale)

Now, if the street chosen needs to have the road surface plus sidewalks repaved anyway, that should then be taken into consideration.

For what’s its worth, translink just put in an 800 stall parking lot in Surrey for $4.5 million. Less than our city is spending to repaint some lines at an angle.

PG Free Press reports that it works out to $27,000 per additional on street parking space.

In light of the City’s poor performance with this winter’s snow clearance it is extremely difficult to support or justify spending 8 million to change the configuration of on- street parking in the downtown especially when there is no money in the existing budget to proceed with this project.

The motion the three councillors are bringing forward this evening is a clear indication that council and City administrators are not on the same page. This appears to be a case of Councillors not being well enough informed by administration or not doing their homework when this bylaw first came before them in July, now they find themselves back paddling in response to public objection after the fact.

Interceptor, they showed that parking lot on the news! Nobody is using it because of the parking fees.

$ 4.5 million to re-configure the parking on 4th Avenue? Will this include proper sidewalks, i.e. smooth and even, decorative lamp standards with flower baskets and provision for Xmas lighting, decorative tree plantings, corners with benches and decorative planter backgrounds, perhaps a small plaza with a decorative fountain and gazebo, some drinking fountains and perhaps a well maintained clean 21st century public washroom. In other words the whole nine yards!

If not, I am against it!

Here is the link to that Translink $4.5 million dollar park and ride lot that no one is using. A message to our city “perception is everything”; if the consumer thinks it’s being gouged, it will not support an initiative.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/translink-39-4-5m-surrey-park-ride-lot-192600104.html

Gus: “For God’s sake, the % raise isn’t important, what is important is the final amount of compensation. “

Forget it gus, I wouldn’t expect the resident geniuses would be able to grasp such a difficult concept as this.

Lol.. For Gus and JB.. % shows the rate of the increase.. That way it is comparable to others increases.. It’s called mathematics.. Guess a GED just doesn’t cut it here guys..back to school for you two. :-)

It’s funny becauase he still doesn’t get it. Better quit while you’re behind, p val.

Lol.. Yeah yeah JB.. I am so far behind because I have lapped you so many times it’s funny..

Angled parking is on-street parking in which the vehicle has it’s front closest to the curb. Angled parking uses less linear curb length per parking space than traditional parallel parking so more spaces can be provided on the same block.

The city is moving toward angled parking to maximize future space utilization, and revenue generation, for paid parking. IMO of course.

Peoples. Didn’t we have nothing but angled parking in the 80’s ? Guess time to dig out my platform shoes :)

With this city it’s “back to the future”, and reaching into our pockets for parking fees more efficiently and effectively!

Mayor Green, Wilbur, and Stoltz, just lost another vote on downtown parking. The graduated fee increase was voted in.

Your lack of math skills and comprehension make it difficult to believe you’ve lapped anybody, p val. Don’t kid yourself.

Poor JB

Tell you what P Val.

If you can tell me how many years it will take at a 3% per annum increase to catch up with Councillors in comparable cities to their $30,000/year compensation from a local Councillors $20,000/annum compensation in the unlikely case that the comparable cities will hold the line on their Councillors compensation, you will have partially redeemed yourself.

You can fully redeem yourself if you can tell us how many years it will take to catch up if the Councillors from comparable cities get 1% increases per year over the time period it takes to catch up.

Promise not to get help from you 12 year old sister.