"...then with that nucleolus, it is my belief that we can build a viable group to become watch dogs of city spending, not unlike most other cities."

That's exactly what this town needs - a nucleolus.

And do what? Whine in unison? Withhold our taxes? Hold our breath until we turn blue? Find hizzoners passport and then hide it? UNvote them out? Given the extent of the turnout at the tax increase "seminar", I don't hold out much hope. Apathy doesn't sell. Especially if it is a good night on television.

Its put up or shut up time. It will be interesting to see how this comes out.

You can rest assured that the Mayor and Council hopes it fizzels, however I think that this is an idea who's time has come.

As I beleive Winston Churchill once said ** No Army in the world can stop an idea who's time has come**

And I say no Mayor or Council can stop this idea from becoming a sucess if people will get on board and help. We have to stop this out of control taxing and spending.

If it's a constructive group of well-meaning (non-hatchet weilding) citizens who operate in a reasonable fashion then this could work.

If it's the same old group of people who scream bloody murder at everything not involving pothole filling then it's dead already.

If you don't hold out much hope, then that is fine. Sitting and hoping gets you nowhere. Sitting and not hoping much gets you in virtually the same place.

As JFK said: "Ask not what your City can do for you but what you can do for your City."

Here is a successful group. They managed to shift the seats on Council. They obviously have many of the similar concnerns of some people in this community, and probably many other communities as well.

I was made aware of this group by another individual who posts on here and is keenly interested in a ratepayers association.

http://guelphcivicleague.ca

from that site:

These ten values direct our work:

Greater voter turnout.

Genuine public consultation on major issues.

http://www.captr.org/members

We are not unique. We can get help from some of those who have been there and done that.

Better city planning and design to manage growth.

Clean economic development to offset residential taxes and provide jobs.

Complete cost/benefit analysis of major decisions and investments.

Less red tape for local businesses.

Ecological awareness and protection of the highest standard.

A strong commitment to culture and the arts.

Heritage identification and preservation.

Quality and beauty as civic priorities.

There is not one single item on there that I feel we are doing as well at as we should be and as we can be. With some dedication to getting things done, I bet you we will even be able to do much of it with the same tax rate we currently have.

I couldnt find the website for Guelph association as I looked up the City website. But here is another
http://kingstontaxpayersassociation.ca/index.htm
And they have the same problem as we have here in PG. Council dances to the tune of our bussiness groups that are organized and get their attention.

Cheers

Owl I see you have flushed that out a little more. I think you are on to something. I like the idea of a ratepayers association especially if it is broad enough to take into account the topics you bring to light. I think for sustainability it would need to be broadly focused and most of those are topics that I think all in this city could get behind and support.

The only one I would leave out is the idea of making it an advocacy group for the culture and arts. That would alienate far too many and diminish the rest of the potential to move foreword on the other topics.

I applaud Kim for taking this foreword and will likely get in touch to find out more.

Cheers

The Kingston site is very interesting. Quite detailed on the voting records, but not enough detail on what the issues are about from my point of view. As an outsider I really do not see business plans, etc. And I also do not see anything mentioning that or someone making the effort to go to City Hall to get the information available and posting it.

One thing I know, any such efforts take a lot of work by individuals who have a good knowledge base in a whole spectrum of publications.

That site is obviously put together by someone who loves doing stuff on the internet with respect to putting to together meeting minutes and tying the votes to issues.

At the bottom left one can find links to some purpose of the group.

http://kingstontaxpayersassociation.ca/FinancialIssues.htm

I think we can identify with the finacila issues when putting this community's past as well as proposed major facilities into the discussion.

This is whats driving our council at the present time, are advocacy groups, ie business community. My objective is to monitor the expenditures at City hall that will address the needs of taxpayers ; ie pot holes. And we need honesty not dreams and wish list of City Council.

Someone didnt give us the facts on garbage collection. Council wanted the new system and said to hell with the taxpayers and went for it. There were other alternatives to reduce the amount of garbage to reduce tipping fees.

I could go on for ever but I will let you decide what you want, more taxes or good government.
Cheers
Kim Reynolds

It sure as hell won't hurt.Politicians of any kind hate to have to answer to anyone.They also tend have very large egos and think that they are right and the public is wrong.I have seen quite a few city councils in PG over the years,and the present one really sucks!If they know they are being watched, maybe they will pay more attention to public opinion.Just because they managed to get elected doesn't mean they will actually be good at the job!It's dangerous to simply assume they will do the job right all the time! A watchdog is a good idea who's time may have come!

On page 16 of 74 in this link http://www.city.pg.bc.ca/cityhall/agendas/2005/2005_02_23_Budget_6.pdf it states:
“expected operational savings in 2005-2009 - Implementation of a user pay automated garbage collection system, opening a new transfer station in the Southwest sector, improved recycling participation, and working towards alternate compost disposal will result in operational savings for volume of garbage handled, while increasing collection capacity.”

So there are 4 activities which will result in the EXPECTED operational savings until 2009. Not only that, but it will be for “volume of garbage handled”. In other words, volume goes up, cost will go up as well, but not quite as much as if volume were to stay steady. In fact, it would then be expected to drop according to the staff blurb..

So, have we been given the smoke and mirrors proposal? In fact, I wonder whether Council did not look into this deeply enough. I mean, one has to rely on the administration doing their work and Council doing a bit of an audit. If you can’t trust staff, you are doomed.

So, I know we have a semi-automated collection system.

1. I do not know whether we have a Southwest sector transfer station.

2. I know that if the city were to do curbside recycled goods pickup, that the use would likely go up by 50% based on other municipalities. I do not know what has happened here with respect to recycling and how much of that is captured in city “volume handled” data.

3. I do not know whether we have alternate compost disposal (although it says they were just going to work at it rather than having something in place :-) )

So where does all this leave us? Does anyone here understand what is going on? Can someone provide us with a waste engineering 101 course of how this city does it and how much each part is costing us and whether our bin costs and other utilities collection and property taxes are paying for our own as well as other’s garbage collection.

Palopu???? Where are you?

By the way...Gordon Campbell's Advisory panel on Compensation for politicians is going to be in Prince George I am told.I didn't see the notice on this.Does anyone know where and when??
Thanks.

Aside from the saftey factor which is another argument the City used to change the method of collection. But this could also have been controlled. That would be to restrict the size of the garbage cans and the amout that could be picked up at the street.

The City of Abbotsford would only pick up two specified size bags of garbage per collection. If you wanted to leave more then two bags you had to go to City Hall and buy stickers to place on the additional bags.

My plea for help to try and rectify some of the problems we have as taxpayers has not been well recieved. As Owl has wished me luck in my "exploration" to which I have to agree. But we do need bodies at City hall if we want to make changes. Mybe I'll just have to go door to door which I have done before.

At least drop the Mayor and Council a line once in awhile to let them know how you feel. There are some on counsil that can be swayed. And those that cant probably dont check out 250 either.
Cheers
Kim Reynolds

Kimbo don't give up, it takes time and persistence.

I would suggest contacting the North Nechako Group who have been effective in lobbying Council. Their research is thorough, their approach to Council studied and respectful, their determination shows that they are not going to go away.

They are here and they are active.

Best wishes,

didn't I read in the paper last week that 40% of our garbage that arrives at the landfill is recyclable? That's pretty high I'd say but I would also venture to say recycling is not profitable enough for anyone to get involved in. If it was profitable, it would be financed by government at some level and our taxes would again rise.

"If it was profitable, it would be financed by government at some level and our taxes would again rise." … ??

I think if it were profitable the government would not have to finance it.

We used to have door to door pickup by a private company at one time. I think two of them tried it at a cost of $10/month = $120/year.

So, they made money from the pickup, not as much from the sale of the recyclables. In fact, I believe some were simply stored somewhere or dumped since there was no market for them. However, there was obviously not enough interest at that price so it failed. Or they ran a poor operation.

So, why is recycling bottles, etc. working? You pay at the counter and you get money back at another counter. No pickup is required. Tires work in a similar fashion.

Add the cost, or some of the cost of recycling into the product and refund the money when that product is returned.

So, add the cost of recycling to products in general and that will pay for curbside pickup. The city gets the recycling money collected.

Otherwise, just keep on making bigger and bigger landfills, pay for the increase in collection whether recycled or not, pay for the handling at the dump.

Either way, the consumer pays.

Don’t consume, there is nothing to throw away, there nothing to collect, and you do not have to pay collection fees. I am sure the City can set that up for individuals who do not want the garbage truck to stop at their place.

Oh, and then increase the fines for illegal dumping 100 fold. That’s to pay for the enforcement costs.

So, the choice is ours to make …. Otherwise move to the boonies and dot the landscape with piles of junk in such a North American fashion. After all, that is the right of every freedom loving North American and makes for some great roadside photography for tourists …. See how the poor people in North America live in their tar paper shacks surrounded by garbage.

BTW ... the Times Colonist has a front page story today about their garbage dump. It is growing by leaps and bounds and they are not meeting their target of reducing garbage.

Reason? Increased housing construction and renovations. All the old construction material as well as packaging for new materials and old furniture, rugs, etc. going to the dump.

Real reason? …. The same as always, a more affluent society. In a throw away world, and an economy based on that notion, ther will be more garbage.

Hey wait, we need to get someone at UNBC to write a thesis before anyone will accept that hypothesis of old.

Then we will set up a garbage reduction implementation planning committee and they will make 10 year plans so that they can figure out where the garbage comes from so that they can put legislation in place to make them stop.

;-)

and they will ask for a ten year extension so that they can model it on a computer .....

;-)

shoot .... I just made a booboo ...

If anyone at City Hall, the UNBC, or the MoE reads this they may see more dollars flowing their way for an extension to the empire.

The best military plan in the world isnt worth the powder to blow it to hell if the general has no troops to fullfill that plan.

Cheers

Kimbo ..... I do not wish to be trite, you are so right, so it would seem reasonable that a troop recruitment plan would be the first thing to work on.

My take is that this is the wrong palce to do that. As Foo738 says, you have raised an issue which is on many people's tongues and is worth pursuing.

However, you may find that the tongues is as far as the issue goes. It may be too broad an issue. One of the reasons I feel that the Nechako group has been successful is that they are very focused and are putting all their effort into that.

Perhaps you should pick one area where you feel the city is overspending; an area where economies could be had and the same service provided for less dollars; or an area where service is provided and it is not an area which should be in the hands of the city at all.

Take the police station; take the roads; take the PAC; take IPG; take City Council ......

If you take one, you will likely find many people who are of like mind as you are and are quite articulate about it .... if you take them all, you may find that by the time you get those people who aggree on them all together, you are stuck with whiners who will do nothing to change things.

Kimbo.

I think what you have to do is take the Citys budget numbers for 2006/2007 and compare them to the following Citys.

(1) Nanaimo
(2) Kamloops
(3) Kelowna.

I beleive that you will find that our costs in all departments match or exceed those of these Citys. As an example we have more Police per capita that the above Citys. We have more debt. We probably spend millions more on recreation, such as swimming pools, arena, CN Centre, etc;

As an example we spent $12,900,975.00 on Leisure Services in 2006 Revenue was $5,926,895.00 Net cost $6,967,848.00

Some significant costs.
Aquatics. Loss-$2,194,594.00
CN Centre Loss-$ 541,999.00
Civic Centre Loss 519,253.00
Civic Facilities Loss $ 1,700,629.00
Arenas Loss $954,188.00

I beleive that we have far more City staff per capita than these Citys. Prince George I beleive have 755 staff.
We pay our Mayor approx $20,000 more per years that Kamloops or Nanaimo and they have a higher population.

My gut feel is that we spend more than these other Citys in all areas, in addition we pay more taxes. I beleive that they generate the same revenue (approx) that we do however their taxes on Industry are much higher than ours. If our taxes on industry matched those in say Nanaimo we could probably reduce our taxes, in any event you get my point.

All this information is in the public domain, and will be supplied to you on request by the named Citys, as it is public knowledge, or it can be found on the internet.

I suspect once you compare all our costs to those of the named Citys and you find that we are taxed more, further in debt, and spend more than them, then you need to ask the City just one question. WHY?

A lot of our costs are basic to running the City and of course are going to cost us money, however the question is, where can we reduce costs, and reduce taxes.

Hang in there.

I think we do need a ratepayer's association but first it may be better to all join PACHA. That way we give strength in numbers to that group which is already up and running and making themselves known to city hall. By first supporting this group, we can add more voice and power right now. When the strength of PACHA is strong enough there will be the people and the energy to support both groups. Either group needs strenght from throughout the city which, to this date, has never happened. Thus far we have been small groups protesting and getting nowhere. So, please, put that energy first behind PACHA and let us begin to have the power which is rightfully ours as we are Prince George.

I think we do need a ratepayer's association but first it may be better to all join PACHA.
This has crossed my mind. On the other hand it is a group that is keeping the pressure on council. The North Nechako groups is doing that as well.

Having said that I have to agree with owl. I would like my focus to be on a responsible council that is prudent on where our taxes dollars are spent. Take for instance they have slaped us with a 4% levy. But where will the money come from for the other stuff on the citys wish list, the police building, cameron street bridge, performing arts building and the list goes on.

Has someone ever asked council how efficient their staff is? We cant do it all over night. These people live in a dream world and it will take some effort to change their mind and get them on track. Maybe having Three groups with different idieas and keeping the pressure on will work

And I repeat I would like to start with where the money is spent. They know where to find it.

Cheers

And thanks Pal for the stats on other citys in the province and the debit our city faces.

I havent quit just taking another step. I guess this subject has lived its life as Ben will probably soon shut it down. Lots of good info. Thanks to all

Cheers