Tag Archives: Guelph

Why Change is the real issue in the June 7 Provincial election

By Gerry Barker

May 21, 2018

In just 17 days, the voters in Ontario will go to the polls to elect a new government in Ontario.

In Guelph a riding encompassing only the City of Guelph, the indication is that voters just want Change meaning ABW – Anybody but Wynne. That leaves just three candidates for the Guelph riding including Ray Ferarro, representing the Progressive Conservatives; Mike Schreiner of the Green Party; and fot the NDP – Agnieszka Mlynarz.

The fourth candidate is the Liberal candidate Sly Castaldi who has the dubious task of defending the policies of the Wynne Government whose party is mired in third place in the polls. Chief Liberal problem is the low approval of the leader Kathleen Wynne, who has not budged from a 20 per cent approval rating in more than a year.

The desire for change in Ontario exists right here in Guelph. Right now, the PC’s are leading over all the other parties to form a new government. It is their’s to lose aided and abetted by the Toronto Star’s daily concentrated negative news and commentary carried throughout the news pages. The Star’s target is PC Leader Doug Ford who despite a few missteps, seems to maintain his party’s lead in the polls.

In my opinion, this election is about Change triggered by 15 years of Liberal governments that reflect abuse of the public trust (gas plants destruction). Overbuilding power green generation facilities with expensive long-term contracts (wind and solar) making Ontario with the highest power costs of most jurisdictions in North America.

Even the Ontario Auditor General, Bonnie Lysyk, said the government borrowed $4 billion off its books. This was to finance the five year “fair hydro” 25 per cent reduction of power charged to end users.

What happens then when that money must be paid back? Our power rates will soar in 2022 when the deal expires.

Another reason Ontario will vote for Change.

Assuming the Liberal candidate has no chance of retaining the seat, lets compare the remaining three candidates and what issues are Guelph voters most concerned about? What influence can they have to accommodate their constituents’s concerns and desire for Change?

Health accessibility and long-term care – Ray Ferarro: “If elected, I will work as your member to undo the Wynne government’s cuts to hospital and long term care expansion. I pledge to fight for an end to hallway medicine where patients, for lack of space, are ware-housed in the hallways of Ontario’s medical service institutions.”

The NDP candidate, Agnieszka Mlynarz, is responsible for the Party Leader’s platform that while critical of the Liberals, represents costly social programs that are warmed over policies of the Wynne government. The platform came under fire recently from financial experts who claimed the numbers did not add up. Regardless, NDP leader Andrea Horwath, a veteran of 12 years in the Legislature, has been running an intensive campaign that has her moving the party into second place according to the latest polling.

Can Agnieszka Mlynarz win? In my opinion too many memory of the Bob Ray NDP government still lingers in the minds of many voters. Besides her platform does not represent change but a version of the Liberal’s social engineering policies.

The green tinge of the environmentalists in the NDP does not help in Guelph where citizens were hammered by a secret abortive green-power scheme. It was to create power self-sufficiency and reduce carbon dioxide emissions that are affecting climate change. The cost was more than $60 million of citizen’s public money.

The Green Party candidate, Mike Schreiner, has mounted a well-funded campaign including the best signs on the roads and streets. Voters know that the Green Party under leader Mike Schreiner, has never elected a Green Party candidate in Ontario.

But where does the Green Party money come from?

Well, the Greens held a rally in Guelph that was allegedly attended by 350 people with the guest speaker David Suzuki, the British Columbia multi-millionaire exploiter of fear of the earth atmosphere destroying the planet. This guy has made a handsome living promoting fear and loathing of the use of fossil fuels that he, among others, is destroying our atmosphere.

Some facts. That erupting volcano on the Hawaiian Big Island spews more carbon dioxide, the dreaded CO2, into the atmosphere in five minuses than all the fossil-fueled facilities in Canada in a month.

Canada contributes two per cent of all global CO2 emissions in a year.

This is the party that elected three members in the B.C. legislature and yjeu are propping up the NDP government opposed to the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain oil pipeline. It will take Alberta crude to the Pacific and open new markets for our resources.

The Canadian Government approves the pipeline as it has passed all regulations including an environmental assessment. But the three Green Party members of the B.C. legislature are dead against it. Based on the hypothetical argument it will carry fossil fuel feed stock and the threat of a tanker oil spill on its coastline is too great a risk.

More facts: The polls in B.C. show the majority of people are in favour of the pipeline. The three Green Party objectors have been members of the Legislature for little more than a year. Yet they are effectively stopping construction, so far, this pipeline that is legal and necessary to open up new markets for Canadian resources at better prices now only available from the U.S.

Ask yourself, why is Mike Schreiner running in Guelph?

In my opinion, even if he is elected to the Ontario Legislature, he will be the loneliest member in the House with no power, no influence and no support.

Nice guy but running in the wrong place.

In summary, I like Ray Ferarro for my member in the Ontario Legislature. He is the only candidate born, raised and worked in Guelph and as a former city councillor who knows what the people are concerned about.

That’s why he will work to improve our ailing healthcare system. Battle to stop the Guelph Hydro/Alectra merger now before the Ontario Energy Board for approval.

He will speak up on the issues affecting Guelph not only in the P.C. caucus but also in the legislature.

If elected, we can depend on Ray being part of Change at Queen’s Park.



Filed under Between the Lines

It’s time to stop financing the myth that bicycles are a major mode of transportation

By Gerry Barker

May 15, 2018

If you drive around town enough you can see how the two-wheeled cycle has pushed its way into our environment. Bike lanes are the stepchild of the consortium of the environmentalists many of whom are embedded in all levels of government.

Bicycles are seen by the environmentalists as its public face and proponent of eliminating fossil fuels as an energy source to be replaced by pedal power.

Say hello to thunder thighs and the new city of Guelphenhagan.

Guelph has been a leader in shrinking vehicle lanes to install or widen bike lanes. Every repaving of a major city street, is re-marked to accommodate bike lanes

I am reminded about eight years ago when then councillor Maggie Laidlaw, an ardent cyclist, predicted that in 20 years there would be no cars on the streets of Guelph.

Well, it hasn’t work out that way.

Instead, we have more fossil-fueled cars and commercial vehicles on our street than ever before.

The former Farbridge administration pushed hard to provide more and wider bike lanes wherever a major road was resurfaced. In many cases, vehicular traffic was confined to just one lane each way.

Such was the former mayor’s legacy to create today’s traffic congestion on our major streets and routes.

An example if this planning was the resurfacing of Downey Road. Before the road was resurfaced, a decision was made to widen the bike lanes to allegedly three meters. Now here is urban planning gone berserk. There are not two painted lines on the road for bike lanes but three.

My information is the planners want to make drivers aware that the actual bike lane had been widened and to give them warning.

Holy Mackinaw! How long does this minority group hold Guelph hostage to serve its use of public streets and roads? The biker minority expands its world at the expense of the vast majority of the population.

So let’s look at the numbers.

The City of Guelph has a ten-year bike lane-funding program of $300,000 a year. Over the years this has paid for lane restrictions, fancy coloured bike boxes at intersections and establishing bike lanes that are not complete. They start and then end, leaving the cyclist to fend with vehicles without the benefit of the completed bike lane. Driving around the city it is apparent that we have a part-time system of bike lanes.

Without question, successive Guelph administrations have spent millions on bike lanes to placate a strident bike lobby represents a tiny portion of the 131,000 people who live here.

Despite the traffic studies that show time and time again that motor vehicles vastly out-number the cyclists, the bike lobby remains funded with taxpayer money. In designing the Downey Road bike lane layout, an independent consultant measured vehicle flow two periods a day when traffic was heaviest. The result was that some 4,000 vehicles used the road during the two test periods while just 113 cyclists were spotted sharing the same road.

We now know that the bike lanes on the right side of Downy have this weird three-line configuration while the original bike lane on the other side of the road was not modified. Again, the vehicle lanes were shrunk to accommodate this new layout.

Who or what department is responsible for these whacko decisions?

Here’s what needs to be done.

Freeze all proposals to create additional bike lanes.

The staff should review and assign resources to complete ‘start and stop’ existing bike lanes on major roads or streets as a priority.

Set up a free bike licensing and safety incentive plan. This would encourage cyclists to protect their property with serial numbers embedded in the metal frame for ID in the event the bike is stolen. Offer front and rear blinking lights, a warning device and fluorescent vests. A copy of the Highway Traffic Act should be given each cyclist. This opportunity would have a time limit to encourage cyclists to sign up.

Unlicensed cyclists would face fines and possible suspension.

If we are to allow cyclists to use the bike lanes, observe the HTA rules covering the use of public streets, then the marriage of pedal power and the internal combustion engine powered vehicle should be much improved.

The Wild West that now exists is the outcome of neglect by the administration.

Vehicles using the public roads are required to pay taxes including ownership taxes, insurance taxes, property taxes, environmental taxes, sales taxes for fuel and repairs.

Cyclists using those same roads only pay, perhaps property taxes if they own property.

Until we tackle these issues the public money spent on bike lanes will continue unabated without the rule of law governing the safe sharing of the public thoroughfares.






Filed under Between the Lines

Some of the cheesy council decisions now leading up to the civic election.

By Gerry Barker

My 9, 2018

Editor’s Note – Guelphspeaks faced some computer glitches last Sunday as we attempted to launch a new post. We’re back in business now. GB

If you like cheese, as I do, council was unable to turn Limburger into New York cheesecake when the opportunity arose. You will see how a majority of council voted to eliminate online voting in 2018, the Committee of the Whole (COW), the merger of Guelph Hydro and Alectra utilities aka “the Great Guelph Giveaway.”

The heady scent of Gorgonzola lingers over the council chambers today as Mayor Guthrie gushes about a linkage with the County of Wellington to win $100,000 in some vague lottery of spending other people’s public money. Go figure.

The relationship between County and City is strained, has been for some time.

Over the years the city agreed to share the cost of public health services with the county. Mayor Farbridge, who was on the public health board at the time, objected to the cost of building a new public health headquarters on Stone Road costing some $17 million.

She sued to get out of the arrangement and lost so without consultation, the project went ahead and cost Guelph some $10 million.

Ah, the sweet whiff of cheddar melting on a hot apple pie.

Another handout by the City to the County was to handle the affordable housing file.

The result that in ten years there was no construction of affordable housing in the City but the towns and hamlets in the County received affordable housing units.

If I didn’t know any better, was this decision made by Guelph Council to prevent lower income people from deflowering the Royal City? Just asking. Was it an elitist Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) decision?

These are a few examples why Guelph should assert its mission as a city of 131,000. The city’s needs and interests are different from that of the County of Wellington. The city is now a Provincial and Federal riding within its city limits.

It means we need to elect councillors who have experience, are responsible, understand financial data and are politically positioned in the centre.

The problem we face is old town rules that state a councillor only works part-time so should be paid on that basis. We will never solve this problem until we increase the salaries of the 12 councillors. And make them full-time. What is the cost to double their salaries? It’s just $840,000.

We only get what we pay for. Raising the salaries and benefits for councillors will attract well qualified candidates with a subset of truly representing the people

My argument is basic. These 12 alleged part-timers are responsible for overseeing a $500 million corporation. Yet 80 per cent of the $380 million annual budget is going to the paid staff who work for the council, our representatives..

Consider the $ 130,000 salary paid to the Mayor. He is the head of the community. Yet the four top senior managers earn more than $200,000 a year and the numbers trickle down among the ranks of the remaining 90 managers.

The way it is now, anybody with some $3,000, which is what it would cost to run in a ward for that $35,000 part-time job.

This is how the former administration kept control. Many of those successful councillors accepted campaign funding from unions as well as some deep-pocketed NDP supporters.

We cannot do much about it now as the current system remains in place until the new council is elected next October.

By electing councillors in the majority who are not ideologically bent, are beholden to no one and love their city enough to run for council, only then can we return the city to one of the most attractive and affordable in the country.

Unfettered public participation in the affairs of our city is a high calling.

Please pass the Camembert and crackers.

NOTE – If you are thinking about running for council, and have questions, feel free to contact me at gerrybarker76@gmail.com so that we may connect for an interview. Your information will be confidential and respected.




Filed under Between the Lines

Part Two: How to change our city by reducing operating costs, property taxes and user fees

By Gerry Barker

May 3, 2018

Here is a list of changes that a new council will face to effect change. For every action there is a reaction including job security, money, public services and that old standby, entitlement.

Some will say these proposed reforms are draconian and the staff service to the public will be seriously affected. Let’s look at some examples:

Bike lane expansion;

Waste management costs;

The wellbeing program;

Grants to non-governmental organizations;

Materials and service procurement checks and balances;

Subsidies to Guelph Transit and other organizations;

Cost of water and electricity;

Legal and consultant costs;

Staff reduction through rationalization;

Planning and development costs;

Debt management and costs;

Staff and council expenses;

Advertising costs;

Budget variances;

Reserves rationalization and replenishment;

Review all staff contracts.

You be the judge.

Let’s start with an action plan.

* Stop the Guelph Hydro merger with Alectra even if it means hiring an energy experienced lawyer to make our case before the Ontario Energy Board.

*   Make no specific promises about lowering property taxes until council receives a full, independent analysis of proposed budgets in 2019 and 2020.

* Review all bylaws to establish effectiveness, relavence and currency.

* Close down the recyclables’ operation of Dunlop Road and negotiate a deal with Waste Management to take our recyclable materials to its plant in Cambridge.

* Hire an Auditor General to oversee all spending and systems who reports directly to council every three months.

* Review the council Code of Conduct and dismiss the Integrity Commissioner. Also dismiss the Amberlea-Gravel special closed-session investigators. Replace A-G with the Ontario Ombudsman’s Office closed-session investigative team.

* All closed-session agenda require approval of the Mayor, and two designated councillors. The public must be informed in advance of any such meeting, the reason and outcome. The Mayor must file a separate report to briefly explain the reason, outcome without using names. Residents have the right to request the minutes based on impact and cost of a closed-session meeting. If challenged by any resident, authority to allow a closed-session council meeting will be made by an outside appointed adjudicator.

* Adopt the recommendations of the Pat Fung report that outlined how the city can reduce its overhead to save $20 million a year.

* Confine the committee of the whole system to only vote on a motion, because most of the issues have already been discussed in closed-sessions. The committee of the whole meetings are still too long and time wasting.

* Review all rules concerning public participation including notifying all citizens of council meetings. Reliance on such notices excludes many citizens who do not have access to computers.

* Restore Online voting for the 2022 civic election.

* Order the internal auditor to investigate the following.

*  Rules and regulation of procurement of supplies and services including systems’ controls, verification of work performed. Any order exceeding $1,500 must be  made by a Request For Proposal (RFP) and publicized Online and in the local      newspaper.

*  Commence a formal review of Guelph Transit operations including an audit of the last three departmental budgets.

*   Appoint a public advisory committee to work with Transit management to plan a more efficient system.

*  Freeze the bike lane budget until a thorough study is completed to ascertain future viability and usage.

* Develop a plan within 90 days to reduce full-time staff, part-time staff and contract employees by ten per cent by December 2019. The Police, Fire and EMS will be exempted.

* Cancel the ”City News” advertising pages in the Guelph Tribune. Replace with weekly online reports and supply a print copy to residents without a computer.

* Examine and redefine the role of the communications department.

* Cancel the two per cent property tax surcharge and the storm water charges added to the hydro bills.

* The finance department will send a quarterly copy of the financial status of the city as it pertains to the city budget (variances) and non-budgeted charges.

* In all new staff contracts the accumulation of unused sick leave and vacation time will be eliminated. Use it in a calendar year or lose it. An arbitration board composed of two councillors and three civilians will oversee any derivations or exceptions.

* Appoint a new accountability committee composed of three councillors and three civilians to examine and recommend reducing the amount of funding the city provides many organizations and services.

* With council and staff, prioritize budget items by October 15 each year.

* Drop all planning department work on the Reformatory lands.

* Halt the intensification emphasis on future developments and freeze all plans. Commence planning subdivisions of single-family homes in a range of price points.

* Cancel free downtown parking for all employees.

* Review all payments made to non-governmental organizations.

The city is not a bank or a lender. All such requests must be considered by the staff and approved by council. Such requests will be frozen until the state of the city finances is positively corrected and overhead is substantially reduced to lower property taxes.

The terms and results of the annual city financial audit, as required by the province, must be made public Online and in print to those requesting it.

Similarly, a summary of the Financial Information Report to the province must be available by Jan 31 the year following.

The direction of these issues has a two-fold affect. The first is to returtn the power to the people through its elected representative. Second, the staff influence will be more focused on executing the reforms and thereby restoring open government, and meeting the will of the people.

All citizens should be on guard to prevent the financial disasters of the previous and current administrations.

Next October the people have their say on how they want their city to function and seize opportunities to develop smartly and gradually lower our taxes and user fees.






Leave a comment

Filed under Between the Lines

A Fable: Not even super hero Chickenman can save the peasants from financial fiasco

By Anonymous

Posted March 3, 2016

Once upon a time, there was a personable young man who wanted to serve the people of his beloved kingdom of Sustainis Land. He was elected to the Council of Peasants and brought his skill sets to the public trough, controlled by the Queen of the Left and her supporters, thus it was being drained fast.

That’s because the wicked Queen of the Left and her court had eaten all the food in the trough and poisoned the well of public goodwill.

Our hero, decided to run for the office of Lord Mayor of the Peasants, occupied by the powerful Queen of the Left.

Well, a funny thing happened on the way to the election. The queen’s court had made a huge mistake in judgment by losing a lawsuit brought on by the builders of the new castle that was to house the queen’s court and courtiers. The hapless buidlers were fired before the contruction was finished.

About the only thing this castle was missing was a moat to keep the peasants out. It was the place where the queen’s court, located in the bucolic village market centre, carried on the peasant’s business in secret, far from the madding crowd.

Enter our ambitious councillor who promised to protect the poor villagers from the oppresive taxation by the Queen of the Left. He promised to reduce taxes and restore the rights of the people. When the election was held, our hero soundly defeated the Qieen of the Left. In his former role as a remittance man, our hero met many peasants who supported him because he was admired and assumed trustworthy.

But the new mayor was befuddled by what he inherited from his predeccesor. He inherited a tangled financial mess and an obstinate staff. But he made the decision to get along with his council regardless.

Our hero quickly learned that his council was still controlled by the supporters of the Queen of the Left. Being a reasonable man, he sought to work with all members of council.

Then the thunderbolt happened! On March 15, just three and one half months on the job, our hero discovered that the majority of council voted to raise the taxes on the peasant’s properties by 3.92 per cent. This made our hero unhappy because he had promised the voters who elelcted him that he would limit tax increases to match the official Peasant’s Cost Index (PCI) of just two per cent.

Quel dilemma! It got worse as events unfurled instead of solving the problems of the peasants.

Next to seeing the 2015 budget break our hero’s promise for lower taxes, came the preparation and agreement for the 2016 budget. Again, it contained a greater tax increase than was promised by our hero. In fact, totalling the two budgets approved by our hero’s first year in office, the peasant’s property taxes were increased by 6.91 per cent.

Next came the revolt of five members of the Queen of the Left to walk away from a regular meeting of council, chaired by our hero. There was no admonishment, no action taken to censure those five councillors who walked out. The peasants were mystified why it happened and still are to this day.

The peasants of the village, particularly the vast numbers who supported our hero’s election wondered what happened to their champion. They still wonder and without explanation from their hero are losing patience and confidence.

The sounds of cluck-cluck were heard throughout the village and there were even T-shirts with Chickenman printed on the front sprouting up among the populace.

The peasants were coming to the realization that their hero, elected to change and reform the city, was essentially looking after his self-serving interests and his desire to go beyond Sustainis Land to become a senior government representative.

And folks, that’s when our hero became known as Chickenman amonf the Sustainis Land peasants; who failed to respect the people who elected him but chose to use his skills to divert attention to confront those members on council and stop the bleeding of the public purse.

It is now abundantly clear, our hero will always be labelled as Chickenman because he headed for the hen house when the roosters took over his council.

It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s Chickenman.





Filed under Between the Lines

Did City Clerk Stephen O’Brien get a call from Karen about her friend Susan Watson?

Posted September 2, 2015

It is a stunning pre-determination outcome of the Compliance Audit Committee (CAC) meeting September 10. City clerk Stephen O’Brien has said he doesn’t believe that Susan Watson has to reimburse the city for the cost of her election complaint.

O’Brien did not reveal the total audit costs except that he said the auditor William Molson’s fee was fixed at $7,500. The fee that Mr. Molson contracted for was $7,500.plus $500 for each meeting. In addition the clerk did not include the fee paid to the “subject matter expert” Toronto lawyer, Jody Johnson, hired to advise the CAC members of their duties and responsibilities. Nor does he mention the staff costs spent on the CAC audit.

A rough estimate is the city so far has spent more than $10,000 on the Watson complaint brought on Glen Tolhurst for receiving a donation for $400 from GrassRoots Guelph Voters Association Inc (GRG). As a candidate in the 2014 civic election, Mr. Tolhurst spent less than $2,900 on his ward six campaign in which he was not elected.

The Watson complaint was based on three elements:

* Tolhurst did not claim the value of GRG advertising in the Guelph Tribune of which he was one of 12 candidates suggested for consideration by voters.

Mr. Molson disagreed saying that the GRG advertising campaign was not and should not be considered a contribution to Tolhurst’s campaign.

* Susan Watson stated that GRG erroneously called itself a business when in fact it was a citizen’s group.

Mr. Molson disagreed. GRG is a non-profit incorporated organization under the Ontario Corporations Act and therefore entitled to make donations in municipal elections.

Tolhurst’s greatest sin: Clerical errors valued less than $10

The auditor noted that Tolhurst contravened the Ontario Municipal Elections Act (MEA) by failing to note in his official expenses report the cost of a city map ($5.50), checked off the wrong box on the form and under-reported an expense by $1.

It is ludicrous for O’Brien to suggest that Tolhurst contravened the MEA on that basis so therefore Watson does not have to repay the city. The auditor, in his report, said the reporting errors were not enough to be considered a contravention of the MEA

Why, before the committee has had a chance to consider the Molson report, is the city clerk claiming that Ms. Watson, the person who made the false allegations that caused the audit, is not responsible?

His comments, as a senior city official, are unworthy, unprofessional and slanted. The people have already determined that this complaint was vindictive and frivolous. And conducted at the public expense.

The clerk says the CAC could “commence legal action against Tolhurst if the auditor found that Tolhurst contravened the Act”.

Does the city of Guelph really want to go to court over election expense errors under $10? The CAC’s own auditor stated the errors were not significant to warrant such an action.

The committee “will probably weigh the perceived and severity of the contraventions,” the clerk added.

Clerk says we have to follow proper procedures

While the CAC is independent of Council, the clerk stated, “it is their job to ensure that the proper process is followed.”

Mr. O’Brien, are you suggesting that the proper process was not followed? Are you basing your statement that repayment of public funds by Susan Watson “is not going to happen?”

Let’s get this straight. The CAC May 6 ordered an audit of Glen Tolhurs’s election expenses. May 20, the CAC selected William Molson to perform the audit over the objections of one CAC member, who said an auditor with more experience in such cases should be selected. Molson’s bid was the lowest of three.

This appears to be following procedures.

Mr. Molson commenced the audit process in June. Nowhere during the audit investigation were there failures of procedures.

When Molson released the report, he found that the accusations made by Susan Watson failed to meet the test under which she claimed Tolhurst contravened the Act.

The CAC has little choice in this matter. It’s own auditor has basically said the complaint is unfounded. His judgment was based on law, the MEA and the Corporations Act. He said changing those laws was beyond the scope of the CAC.

The most egregious part of this is O’Brien’s blatant interference in the process is that Watson would not have to repay the public funds used to support her claims

Hello, Karen?


Filed under Between the Lines

Some questions for Andy Best Guelph’s new open government program manager

Posted August 28, 2015

The Mercury ran a FrontPage story this week accompanied by a photograph of the new open government manager, Andy Best.

Well, let’s start by testing how transparent and open Guelph’s new manager really is.

* When was it decided to establish a new position to manage a transparent and open government (T and O)?

* How was the salary of $91,000 determined if this position is a first in Canada?

* Why is the position a contract position with a one-year duration?

* Where was the position posted?

* What were the job specifications for applicants?

* How many applicants responded to the job posting?

* Who posted the position and who interviewed applicants?

* According to the story in the Mercury, why is the focus on developing Internet –based communication programs when a large portion of the population does not use computers or smart phones?

* Were you not a president of the Guelph Civic League?

* Did you not support former mayor Farbridge in her failed re-election campaign?

* Did you receive compensation for work done on behalf of the Farbridge campaign?

* Why is there no mention of opening council and staff meetings that are consistently conducted in camera?

* Who do you report to?

This exercise smacks of a patronage appointment for work done on behalf of the previous administration. It is too coincidental that a loyal supporter of the former mayor and her chosen slate of candidates lands a great job with the city. Is it possible to assume that this position was not part of the 2015 budget?

And if it was, why wasn’t it debated in an open and transparent council meeting as part of the budget discussions?

This is exactly the kind of policy decisions that were made, in secret, for the past eight years by an administration that failed to protect its fiduciary responsibilities to the people.

There is no secret about the fall-out. Most voters decided that losing more than $14 million on the failed New City Hall project called for a change in the way the city was being managed.

There is no room for patronage appointments, particularly choosing those who were party to the failed policies of the previous administration.

The policies proposed by Andy Best in the Mercury, illustrate that the real problems in Guelph need to be solved by reducing costs, reviewing all management procedures and fixing the aging infrastructure.

It isn’t necessary to establish a department that is planning new communication services that has nothing to do with transparency and open government.

Andy Best cites the do-it-yourself budget simulator program on the city website, allowing citizens to tinker with departmental budgets. It amounts to nothing more than a survey. It is devoid of the nuts and bolts of budget management. A clear example is the lack of any information about the costs of lawyers and consultants.

It’s a dreadful sham that will be disregarded when the real budget planning gets under way next month.

That’s a sad excuse for selling T and O to the taxpayers.



Filed under Between the Lines