How the University has taken advantage of Guelph taxpayers

It started in 1983 when the Ontario Universities and Colleges were granted a special deal by the Provincial government. In lieu of municipal property taxes, those institutions were granted a $75 per student charge. It’s called the bed tax.

It hasn’t changed in 29 years. No adjustment for inflation.  It was the gift the provincial governments of all stripes gave to municipalities, that keeps giving.

Well, it didn’t work out that way.

As taxpayers are aware, a lot has changed in our society in the past 29 years.

In Guelph, the University has grown from a small educational institution with perhaps 5,000 students in 1983 to whopping 22,000 students today and counting.

So, what’s the big deal?

Well, the expansion of this University has created pressure on the city to accommodate an influx of part-time students every year.

This accommodation includes increased cost for transit services. Students pay for bus passes at a discount that residents do not receive. The city must operate a service that accommodates a six-month influx of 22,000 students that has driven the taxpayer subsidy of public transit through the roof.

In addition, there has been dramatic development of the University that has affected such city services as water and sewer facilities, power, roads, fire, medical and police services, and additional city staff to process the growth.

Is $75 per student in 1983 still worth $75 today? One estimate is $121.50 compounded over 29 years.

Let’s examine the difference between what the city will receive in 2012 from the University in lieu of property taxes and what the city should receive when inflation is factored in.

In 2012, the city, (based on $75 X 22,000 students.) will receive $1,650,000.

Based on the inflated value of the dollar, ($121.50), the total is $2,673,000.

The shortfall is $1,023,000.

Local single-family neighbourhoods have been turned into student ghettos. The municipality has given the right to unscrupulous landlords to convert those homes into multi-occupational residences.

The past month has witnessed the debacle as students decamp at the end of the second semester. Garbage, and unwanted furniture dumped on the streets has plagued residents living near the University.

It’s the dross of a generation that doesn’t give a damn about the consequences that affect its temporary home, our city.

Yet the University does nothing except oppose a proposal to build a private student hi-rise residence at the corner of Gordon and Stone road.

City council does nothing stating if they enforce legal zoning restrictions, the Ontario Civil Rights organizations will fight the matter in the courts on the grounds of discrimination against students.

Then we have the Guelph Chamber of Commerce gloating about the University’s economic value to the city.

I guess if you operate one of the 33 bars downtown you would agree. Especially when the University closes down its pubs to remove ant competition. During student season – September to April – downtown on weekend is soaked (pun) with students seeking to unload their problems with booze.

The laughable attempted by Coun. Ian Findlay and former Coun. Mike Salisbury to set up temporary pissoirs (male only) to stop indiscriminate public urination after the bars closed, was an abject failure.

This failed experiment played into the Farbridge administration ‘s determination to turn Guelph’s downtown in a vibrant and exciting place. After spending millions to accommodate this dream, the strategy recently changed and council approved high-rise condos of up to 18 stories to be built.

The strategy is to bring residential development downtown to fulfill the Mayor’s dream. Good luck with that.

But this ill-fated dream has turned to mush as problems with the University student behaviour has either been ignored or hidden from public view. You choose.

As an observation, some Farbridge supporters on council have ties to the University. This would preclude any firm action on the part of council to correct serious and ongoing student problems that taxpayers face.

Most taxpayers would say: “I don’t understand the problem.”

That’s just the way this council wants you to believe.

It’s another example of gutless administration and mushroom politics.

Interpretation: Keep the natives in the dark.

 

When Kitchen table budgeting doesn’t work

Some Guelph departments budget like my aunt Sue.  She would take her old age pension cheque and buy a new pair of shoes instead straying from her budget.

It’s called the windfall budgeting.

Let’s take Guelph Transit as an example of windfall budgeting.

Last year, the Transit system was being redesigned to interface with the new central transit terminal plus to make routes more cost effective. The plans were the result of more than a year of study that included costing the effort.

Now, one would assume that there was careful consideration before casting the revised plan in stone.

Wrong. With a budget exceeding some $12 million, Guelph Transit is now projecting a $450,000 deficit over budget projections for 2012.

The city’s March operating variance report states the cause of the transit budget over-run was higher fuel costs. Certainly there has been an increase in vehicle fuel costs since last summer. But, one would think that this basic operational cost would have been carefully vetted to provide a hedge.

Obviously such provision was not included in the Transit budget for 2012.

But all is not lost. The variance report states there is a $734,000 surplus in the city’s overall operating budget. That is aided and abetted by a $1 million dividend from the Guelph Municipal Holdings Corporation. Hence the windfall budgeting.

Another department headed by Mark Amorosi, Executive Director of Corporate and Human Resources, racked up a $500,000 deficit in the first three months of the year. Reason given is the cost of Municipal Board hearings and legal cases.

This is a key area that has been shrouded in secrecy. There are no details provided why this budget went over projections in this department. By yearend, the excess spending could be more than $2 million.

As viewers will recall, this is a chief criticism of the Farbridge Administration that it either hides or obfuscates details of spending errors and lack of control of finances.

It’s really simple. Make every department budget accurate and realistic. If an overage occurs, unless it can be proved it is caused by uncontrolled circumstances, the department is stuck with the original budget. Any surplus budget funds remaining at yearend are rolled back to the general administration fund.

This way, staff will have to budget accurately and be accountable. It’s called management folks and the taxpaying public will have a greater understanding how their interests are being served.

And Aunt Sue will forgo the shoes and pay her bills.

Media Watch: Why the sudden interest in Ian Findlay?

GS  Media Watch

Whatever prompted the Guelph Mercury to publish a Page One puff piece on city Coun.  Ian Findlay?  Then more accolades on the editorial page saluting Mr. Findlay’s business survival in the diminishing world of store front DVD rentals.

Mr. Findlay’s municipal interests lie downtown in Ward One. He represents Ward Two where support of issues in that ward seem to be surmounted by those of the Farbridge administration. His unfailing support of the Farbridge downtown agenda diminishes his effectiveness in Ward Two.

In view of the Merciry’s recent critical coverage of the Farbridge administration, it is surprising to take a what could be an interesting business story and make it the Saturday Page One lead story.

As Pogo would say: ” It’s confusing but amusing.”

How council gives citizens the mushroom treatment

It all started in July 2006 when the Kate Quarrie administration approved a $42 million contract subsequently won by Urbacon as general contractor. The contract called for a new city hall to be built at a cost of $32,498,000 and to convert the old city hall into a provincial courthouse costing $9,502,000.

In the fall of 2006, the Quarrie council was swept out of office and replaced by former Mayor Karen Farbridge and 10 supporters.  Her majority was omnipotent with a huge majority of councillors dedicated to changing the city into their own image.

The contract for the two buildings was to be “substantially completed” by February 28, 2008. Subsequent negotiations extended the completion date to September 8, 2008, due in part to more than 350 change orders apparently demanded by the city staff.

The city fired Urbacon on that date because it claimed the contract had not been substantially completed. Chief executioner was Chief Administration Officer, Hans Loewig ,who is no longer working for the city.

It was revealed that members of council had no oversight of this major project. Change decisions were made by the city staff.

On October 9, 2008, Urbacon sued the city for breach of contract claiming  $20 million in damages. The city counter-sued Urbacon for $5 million.

Urbacon claimed the city delayed completion of the project because of hundreds of change orders.

For its part, the city was concerned about expiring leases in buildings, housing public workers, that made the move-in date uncertain. It was revealed that council had ”lost faith in Urbacon’s ability to deliver.”

Here’s where it get sticky.

When all this was going on, the public was left in the dark. All it knew was the builder had been fired by Loewig with little or no explanation.

In the past three and a half years, many subcontractors were not paid by Urbacon resulting in 19 liens against our brand new city hall.

Under the Construction Loan Act, the city withheld $3.2 million and was ordered to pay it to the court. The city and Urbacon agreed to pay $2,370,963 to those subcontractors who filed liens against the city hall project.

In addition, the city also paid another $3,385,205 directly to some subcontractors to complete their work and finish the building.

The city has stated that it is suing the consultant hired to manage the project and the insurer providing the performance bond. That suit is on hold until the city’s trial with Urbacon is settled.

In the fall there will be a non-binding mediation between the city and Urbacon in an attempt to settle their differences. If this fails, a trial is set for January 21, 2013.

Added to this complex array of misadventures was the city hiring Collaborative Structures of Cambridge to convert the old city hall into a provincial courthouse. Details of that contract have never been revealed including the cost.

The fumbling of creating a new city hall and provincial court has created a stunning series of administration errors and with little culpability directed at the decision makers. It will probably take a forensic audit to determine the end cost of the new city hall.

The cost to the city of hiring lawyers still working their way through this swamp of litigation has yet to be revealed.

Instead the public, those paying the bills, is given the mushroom treatment to function in the dark without knowing how their city is being managed, or mismanaged as seems to be the unfolding case

This mess is classic Farbridge.  The citizens are left in the dark because too much of the public’s business is conducted behind closed doors or off-site.

It is noted that even mushrooms eventually see the light of day.

 

 

 

Why Me?

Every once in a while I wonder why I really care about Guelph.

I write my blog without any compensation except the satisfaction that I am exposing the weaknesses of a tired administration.

I’m a lone wolf who pays taxes, supports institutions and worries about the future of our great city.

That’s my motivation to interpret and comment on how the city is being managed. As a professional journalist who has spent a lifetime covering stories from the arrival of the Beatles in America in 1964 to life at the top of the world at Alert, 200 miles from the north pole.

I have worked as a senior editor at the Toronto Star (ironic, eh?) and at one stage in my life was owner and publisher of the Bradford (Ontario) Paper Group.  I have served in the military, on condo and service club boards.  Currently I serve as Finance Chairman of the Regimental Council of the Queen’s York Rangers, 1^st American Regiment based in Toronto and Aurora.

Guelph has been run by a council with an egoistical determination to make its mark despite citizen objections, since 2007. For the past five and one half years this council has controlled the public’s business with little or no opposition.

I have been writing about this group that has dictated policy, regardless of what people think or want or know how to pay the bills.

Now the supporters of this group including the Guelph Civic League, are attacking my articles and postings on guelphspeaks.ca.

I see this as a good sign that my points are striking home. Since starting the blog about 11 months ago, the number of viewers has grown steadily.  I accept no ads and my copy is carefully checked and vetted for accuracy.

I do not have any out-of-towners telling me what to write or influence me in any way.

My goal is to alert the voting public to question the administration and follow the commentary so that a rightful decision is made on election day, October 2014.

 

Is it any wonder why citizens are puzzled and angry?

It was another proposal that came out of the woodwork.

The city leadership has decided this city needs another downtown park.

So, staff has been busy moving a new project along. It will result in about 40 businesses forced to move elsewhere because the southeast corner of Wellington and Gordon Street will become a new downtown park.

Uh, that’s in 2022.

At first blush, staff announced the cost of buying up two strip malls and a separate small animal clinic would be $9 million. This would eliminate the commercial corner and create a pristine park nestled along the shores of the Speed River.

Then the price was revised to cost between $12 and $16 million by 2022.

Let’s see, those on council voting for this foolish scheme will be the same ones who voted for the $16 million civic museum (less Coun. Todd Dennis). But then went off the rails to spend more than $50 million on a wet waste composting plant that has not met targeted production since start-up last September.

So, approving this parks plan, council is saying it will save enough money to pay for the project over the next ten years. I don’t know, but how much money has council saved in the past five and one half years?

How does this work into the announcement that a new $63 million downtown library will be open by 2017? Or how about the south-end recreation centre? Ask Farbridge team player Mr. Dennis about that.

Both these projects will bind the hands of future councils. Those councils may have other plans than to build monuments to the perceived genius of the Farbridge gang of eight.

Let’s drop the vision thing and the obsession with downtown Guelph. Let’s work on putting our financial house in order.

Let’s have good roads, responsible development, more commercial and industrial development to create jobs, more social housing, more recreational facilities with washroom walls that don’t collapse, fewer closed meetings, and more transparency.

It’s not complicated, All that’s required is critical thinking.

Come’on Madame Mayor, open the doors and windows and let the sunshine in.

The Top Ten Farbridge legacies

In the past five and one half years, Mayor Karen Farbridge has ruled the city supported by a majority in the 13-member council. Some in the public prints claim that she has done a great job. It is a point of view not shared by many taxpayers.

So we thought we should pick ten decisions ratified by the Farbridge council that you can judge as being: Wasteful, wonderful or whacky.

The important aspect of this exercise is the cumulative effect of policies introduced in the almost six-year time frame. The result will be higher costs in the city that are passed on to future generations.

There is ample history of this happening. After Kate Quarrie defeated Ms. Farbridge in 2003, council inherited a load of debt and mismanagement that required some drastic changes. History has shown that the Guelph taxpayers are not comfortable with aggressive changes in the administration of their city. The result was Mayor Quarrie and most of her supporting councillors were defeated in 2006 and Karen Farbridge was returned as mayor with a majority of nine supporting councillors.

This is a lesson that should not be forgotten. The following top ten decisions are just a few of the decisions that the Farbridge-controlled council has imposed. Be forewarned, they will not disappear two years from now when the next city election is called.

The Top Ten

Number 10 – The civic museum has cost $16 million so far, including $6 million in government grants. The taxpayer’s share of this project located on private property is $10 million and counting. Like many capital projects the city never reveals real costs. This was passed off to the public as saving a pre-confederation building owned by the Roman Catholic diocese. In barging ahead with the project. Council sandbagged the case for a new downtown library. Mayor Farbridge promised to build a new downtown library in her election pitch. It is still doubtful due to the high debt incurred by the Farbridge council. One of the mistakes made in renovating the old heritage building was ordering custom-made cabinets from a European supplier. Trouble was they were too high and interfered with the sprinkler system. Bottom line: How many visits does the Civic Museum receive each day compared to the number attending the downtown library?

Number 9 – The wet waste plant’s latest price tag is $33 million. The garbage bin collection system is another $15 million. Many close to this project have doubts about its operation. Air quality control remains a problem and, after some retrofitting, the plant is still not operating at full capacity. That’s eight months after the plant was fired up following construction. When does Waterloo’s wet waste arrive daily at the plant when we are unable to process the homegrown stuff?

Number 8 – The Hanlon Business Park – $10 million. The city has borrowed that amount to complete the park. While some property has been sold to developers, not one job has been created in three years. Once again, Guelph’s reputation as a place that is bad for business looms large as a deterrent. Don’t expect the Terry Bradshaw puff video to create an avalanche of new business.

Number 7 – Paying $233,000 to an outside legal firm to settle the ownership of Lt. Col. John McRae’s World War I medals. That exercise took three years to settle. While the medals were on display at McRae House museum, the family launched a lawsuit in 2008 to take possession. The settlement consisted of a public acknowledgement that the family gifted the medal to the museum and a small plaque would acknowledge this.

Number 6 – Firing the new City Hall contractor and renovating the old City Hall for a provincial courthouse, resulting in a $19 million lawsuit yet to be decided. While both sides are exchanging viewpoints it is revealed that the contractor has outstanding subcontractor obligations.  The city has agreed to pay these debts presumably because there are liens attached to the new City Hall. The city maintains this action is not part of any future resolution of the dispute. Cost of renovating the old city hall was completed on a cost plus basis. The end cost to taxpayers has never been revealed.

Number 5 – Taking legal action to avoid paying $10 million, its share of building a new Wellington, Dufferin Guelph public health headquarters. The cost of taking this through the court system is unknown. The City lost and must pay its share of the costs. This is another unbudgeted expense that has contributed to the abnormally high debt in which the Farbridge administration has placed the taxpayers. The dispute is one of other cost-shared projects that have caused divisive splits between the city and its country partners. The question remains why the Mayor cannot get along with her partners.

Number 4 – Allowing the amount of city debt to rise to more than $118 million thereby breaking its own debt-ceiling rule by some $26 million. To most taxpayers, their eyes glaze over when it comes to debt of which they are responsible. Servicing that debt costs more than $5 million this year. That’s not chump change. There are only two ways to reduce it: Raise taxes and fees or increase assessment. The latter takes years to impact the average tax bill. The city’s lack of cooperation with development proposals in recent years has resulted in Guelph being not friendly to business or development proposals. The recent flurry of allowing 18 story condos in the downtown area is the result of an awakening by the Farbridge administration to be more cooperative in promoting new development – both residential and commercial/industrial.

Number 3 – The reincarnation of a new downtown library now scheduled for opening in 2017 will cost of $63 million. In addition, the Chief Librarian says a fund-raising specialist will be charged with raising another $10 million to install furnishings etc in the new facility.

Number 2 – The skating rink in front of the new city hall that cost more than $2.5 million, has its own Zamboni that won’t fit in the special garage built for it. City staff informed council the operating cost for the feature would be $1.2 million a year.

Number 1 – Spending $74 million to rebuild some of the city’s infrastructure as part of a senior government stimulus. The city’s share was $24 million. The spending included such items as $2 million for a bicycle lane on Stone Road, $750,000 for a new time clock in the Sleeman Centre. Plus four years of traffic disruption that affected business across the city.

Summing up

The taxpayer’s future liability is more than $108 million. Add to that accumulated debt of $118 million and the total is $226 million.  When the cost of civic staff is taken out of the budget, it leaves less than $45 million based on the total 2012 city budget of $174 million.

The recent announcement of the 10-year plan to spend $9 million converting a commercial node at the intersection of Gordon and Wellington streets into a new downtown park, begs the question: Why now? On must wonder how council can approve such a long-range proposal with such existing uncertainty in the city’s ability to pay for more grandiose schemes.

The point to all this is to alert taxpayers that there is a limit to what the city can afford.

That limit has already been exceeded.

Did the Mercury join the Julian Ichim fan club?

The recent editorial the Guelph Mercury written about the case of urban actibust  (sic) Julian Ichim was artfully dissected. It deemed to make the point that his $4 million lawsuit against the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario, could clarify the role of Guelph undercover police in the G20 and Olympic Torch run.

Talk about flogging a dead horse.

TorStar owner of the Mercury, through it’s Toronto Star MetroLand subsidiary, has steadfastly criticized the role of the police before, during and after the G20 meeting in Toronto. The local paper brain trust apparently decided this was an opportunity to put a hometown twist of the sad saga of Mr. Ichim.

He is not just an activist as the local paper describes him, he is bent on doing whatever necessary to disrupt and contribute to civic disorder.

He is part of a Guelph-based group of anarchists determined to force their extreme points of view that enrage the authorities and citizens.

Hark back a view years ago when burning brush and tires were set on fire on the Hanlon.  Or the occupation of the Hanlon Business Park construction site that halted development of that project.  He was accused of threatening the family owners of the construction firm. Or remember the gang that pelted buses with eggs and curses. They were carrying guests from the official opening of the Hanlon Business Park.

Along the way, Ichim sued the Guelph Police Services without success.

Then along came the G20 protest and he was a cell leader taking protestors along Toronto streets. Mr. Icim’s political actions lead him from Guelph to Toronto and back. As if Guelph needs anymore notoriety what with the Pierre Poutine robo call scandal.

Frankly, most folks must scratch their heads about his latest attempt to nail the cops.  Perhaps it will bring an end to the violent actions perpetrated by the anarchist cell. Taking on the Province of Ontario in his lawsuit will require deep pockets. Hope the lawyer representing him has cashed the cheque before the pre-trial depositions.

This you can bet on, regardless of the outcome, Mr. Ichim will turn up again, like a bad penny.

And the saga will continue.

 

Skating around the issue

With regards to the Editorial article “Skating around budgeting process” the simple economics of using the Skate Park in the East End of the City deserve serious consideration by City Council and Staff.

The City has rented the skate park for the last two summers – July and August in 2010, but due to staff fumbling it was only available in August in 2011.  Thanks to more staff fumbling this year, it did not even make the list of possibilities.

Now why is the use of this facility a good deal for the City?

In the first place the facility is SUPERVISED!  Skaters must have the proper equipment including safety equipment and helmets. Secondly, the Supervision ensures that horseplay is not allowed. As well the facility carries sufficient Liability Insurance  thus relieving the City of any potential liabilities arising from negligence on their part.  (Take a lesson from the Clair Road washroom incident!) The final plus is that instead of frittering away one million dollars on an unsupervised City facility fraught with Liability issues, the City gets a COMPLETE service for $10,000. (The saving in capital cost avoidance covers 100 years of facility rental.)

Other benefits to the City include problem avoidance – problems that resulted in the City closing the City operated skate park – problems that included excessive noise, late night rowdyism, garbage, illegal activities, and a complete lack of supervision.  Does City Council want to repeat this experience and annoy another neighborhood?

There are times when the private sector provides a better service at a more reasonable cost to the taxpayer.  This is one of those times.  If the City can find $25,000 for Terry Bradshaw, then if should be able to find the $10,000 for this service.  The youth of the City want this service,  and the City needs to provide it for them.

City Councillors, when it comes the skate parks please do not be “penny wise and pound foolish”.

Dan Moziar

Guelph

Guelph Mercury becomes suddenly assertive

Media Watch

Like bombs bursting in air, the mighty Mercury awoke this week from its long sleep covering city hall to discover events that stirred the editor to publish two critical editorials.

It is an event of historic proportions, as I cannot recall in recent memory, the Mercury being critical of the current administration on its editorial pages. I wrote a column on those pages every third Saturday for five years that was critical of the Farbridge leadership.

Managing editor Phil Andrews took the unusual step of acknowledging there are other voices in the community who articulate the warts of the current administration.  To suggest that those critical of public affairs and trust management, address the issues as “a hobby”, is like telling journalism icon H.L. Menken to shut up.

It’s not a hobby Phil, it’s a cause.

People are becoming more concerned about the way their city is being run. There is plenty of evidence that the city authorities massage the news to make them look responsible and innovative.

There are too many instances ignored by the mainstream media that have cried out for detailed explanations from city authorities when things go wrong.

The Mercury lacks critical purpose and it shows. But keep the faith. Things are going to get warmer and more interesting as time wears on.

As Pogo reflected in the Okeefenoki swamp: “We have seen the enemy and they is us.”

Gerry Barker

Editor – guelphspeaks.ca