How the wool was pulled over our eyes

Posted September 23, 2013

First, some background.

Our city entered a new phase in its development in 2006. That’s when the administration under Mayor Kate Quarrie was attacked and undermined by left wing supporters of former Mayor Karen Farbridge. The fall campaign was directed by members of the New Democratic Party and executed in part by the Guelph Civic League whose president was 2010 NDP candidate, James Gordon.

It was a thorough thumping of the Quarrie administration as 10 supporters of the re-elected Ms. Farbridge were elected to city council. It was an event that changed Guelph civic politics forever.

In almost seven years, the Farbridge dominated council has destroyed the basic elements of democratic governance. Here are some examples:

1. Removing transparency from the work of council and committees.

2. Making secret deals with third parties that will affect the city finances for many years.

3. Spending money on ill-defined social engineering policies of which there is little public benefit or input.

4. Spending millions of dollars on outside lawyers to defend or attack misguided legal adventures.

5. Increasing city staff by more than 440 along with boosting salaries, wages and total compensation.

6. For four years running, exceeding annual budgets by a total of $24,771,000.

7. With little public input, inflicting a $52 million waste management system on the city. It fails to serve all residents or effectively process and reduce waste materials destined for the landfill as predicted by management.

8. Increasing taxes on average of 3.72 per cent per year, far exceeding the average Canada Price Index of 1.7 per cent.

9. Through property taxes, subsidizing a public transit system by more than $15 million that is used by less than 13 per cent of the city population.

10. Failing to fulfill a 2006 election promise to build a new downtown library.

11. Spending more than $15 million in the name of heritage preservation, to renovate the derelict Loretto Convent on Catholic Hill into a civic museum.

12. Controlling city public communications that distort, obfuscate and are published in the local papers as paid advertising and rewrites of self–serving press releases.

In summary, the taxpaying public is blocked from learning how and where their money is being spent. Financial statements produced by the city are incomprehensible to the average person, long on content, short on detail and fail to translate the true picture of the municipality’s finances.

The growing public concern is manifested in revelations of financial manipulation and basic staff incompetence. An example is the renovation of the Farmer’s Market disaster in which $500,000 was spent on a new floor and little else. There are no fume exhausts for hot food preparation, no door handles or a sprinkler system. In fact, vendors are told they cannot cook in the building.

But it cannot all be laid on the city staff. The fault starts at the top with Mayor Farbridge and her seven cohort supporters on council. They are the people’s representatives but fail to maintain their responsibility. Instead they rely on senior staff to make decisions usually without question. This places the bulk of city staff in an awkward position of wanting to serve the public but stymied by a controlling senior management.

A dysfunctional management has lowered the morale of many city workers to an all time low.

It’s a situation that must be corrected. The costs associated with the Farbridge eight years in office will negatively reverberate for many years to come. Future councils will have to grapple with financial commitments made in the past over which they had no control.

Sadly, this will affect the willingness for knowledgeable and dedicated candidates to run for city council.

What our city needs are candidates prepared to clean up the mess with common sense and a determination to return financial stability to city government. It won’t be pretty and will call for drastic measures to give the city back to its citizens with transparency, clarity and accessibility.

It is impossible to measure the competence of this administration that reveals a budget shortfall of $2.4 million as of June and making it public in September.


Filed under Between the Lines

10 responses to “How the wool was pulled over our eyes

  1. paul

    The wisdom at city hall never fails to amuse me….but the Three Stooges amuses me as well….they both operate on the same principals bordering between bafoonery and idiocity…….

  2. Shawn B Shawn

    Transit in many cities like Guelph runs at a loss. They will never be profitable. 50% of the ridership is UoG students so maybe you should attack they great deal they get for 100$ a semester to ride unlimited.

    • Shawn B Shawn: Good point. If it weren’t for the students mandatory $100 per semester contribution, Guelph Transit would be in deep trouble. As it is, the management of the Transit system is in disarray with the General Manager fired and now a recently hired supervisor is being questioned about his previous job in which he was dismissed for alleged sexual misconduct. According to reports he was still awarded $200,000 by an arbitrator. This is a continuing embarrassment to the city administration and its hiring practices.

    • paul

      Who hired the alleged pervert???????

  3. 12

    It’s not an embarrassment for the city, it is an embarrassment to Hamilton Transit who’s senior managers gave a glowing recommendation for him. There was no public record of his actions at the time he was hired and no way for the HR department to know what had happened. The hiring practices of the City are very sound and Gerry is just trying to make a story out of something by leaving out actual facts, as usual.

    • 12 It’s an embarrassment when you pay the head of Human Resources $166,000 plus a year to ensure that hiring practices are thoroughly vetted before applicants are offered a job. It is interesting to note the source of those “two senior Hamilton Street Railway officials” who endorsed Mr. Richardson. Did he supply the names when asked for references? If so, the City of Guelph was duped and those two “officials” should be fired for faking the recommendation. Over to you Hamilton.

  4. 12

    oh, by the way… please don’t delete my comments like you usually do when someone doesn’t agree with you

    • John

      Reply to 12
      “The hiring practices are very sound”. Really??? To begin with the salaries Guelph pays are absurdly high, and I can just imagine what their benefits are like. I’m seeing positions that a city the size of Guelph don’t need, for example “Project Coordinator, Immigration Portal within Community and Social Services Department”. Why the heck do we need this? Guelph is only 110k in population. Are we trying mimic the organizational structure of the city of Toronto? We don’t have the tax base to support this kind of garbage, and we must get back to basics. We need PRACTICAL people leading Guelph not McGuinty wannabes. My property taxes have gone up 20% in three years, this is insanity!

    • John: Welcome to Title City where the longer the job title the more meaningless it becomes. If the Guinness Book of Records ever has a category for the longest, meaningless civic job titles in the world, Guelph will win hands down. Couple of points. the last Canada census had Guelph’s population at 128,000. What is unclear is how they measure the 20,000 University Students who live here for six months. The dominant group on council can hardly qualify as McGuinty wannabes. They are much closer to NDP leader Andrea Horwath.

    • !2 Sigh, another commentator unwilling to tell us who he/she is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s