This morning, WL City Councillor Sue Zacharias published a Facebook note citing all of the good things, and, as she cites, under the leadership of Mayor Kerry Cook, that the 2008-2011 WL City Council has done
Read her full Facebook note here
However, I'd like to take a moment to discuss my own thoughts on it:
1)Develop and Implement Arts and Culture Plan
Supporting the existing local Arts & Culture Function is not and does not constitute "A Plan". A Plan is how you will achieve a health Arts and Culture Sector with a plan for a new Performance Arts Centre (long overdue). This should have been done at the beginning of the term by the local government (City of WL/CRD) and not the Central Cariboo Arts and Culture Society, who is a stakeholder in the process, but should not be doing the work itself (reminds me of the fox in charge of the henhouse)
2) Update City Economic Strategy
Again - this is something that should have been started at the very beginning of this term and not mere months before an election... economic development should be something that has our attention everyday and not when we're close to an election
3)Completion of Courthouse Square improvements including 1st Ave sidewalk replacement - just a friendly reminder that this project was overbudget by $40,000
4) Complete a Service Delivery Review:
a)Implemented a Service Delivery Review process designed to objectively review specific departments or functions in order to maximize efficiency, improve customer’s service and/or reduce costs. - WL Council put Staff in charge of looking at existing services - talk about a double standard. When reviewing services - it should be done by someone external... Of course, if WL Staff are looking at it, it only stands to reason that they'll keep existing services where they're at.. and not look at new opportunities to do more with less, especially if it means less City workers'...
b) Prepared and adopted Secondary Suites, Nuisance Property, Graffiti, Boulevard Parking and False Alarm Bylaws - meanwhile voters' are mad over the Registration Fees for the False Alarm Bylaw and how this Council handled the issue of consulting the public on the thorny issue on regulating parking on City owned Boulevards'
c) Passed Industrial Tax Revitalization Bylaw - considering Williams Lake has the #1 Heavy Industry Tax Mill Rate in BC, I don't expect industrial companies to make use of this tax tool for the foreseeable future...
Finally - I'd point out that this Council could cut deeper by eliminating the Executive Assistant position, roughly $60,000 in savings. In this time of restraint - Council needs to do more of its' own work, like writing its own reports and doing research..
18 comments:
Do you understand Steve that the person in that position is a real live human being who would be obviously severely affected if that job was gone? Government workers are a lot more than chess pieces you politicians (or in your case wannabe politician) can play around with and knock off the board. How would you like it if someone spoke about your job that way?
You didn't even get her job description right either.
Wow Steve, just wow. You have no concept of both government and human existance. Just more of a reason as to why you should not garnish any votes, and, god forbid it happens, you get elected, good luck getting any cooperation from anyone in City hall or from those who work early mornings, late nights, weekends, for free most times, to try and make the city a better place.
You wonder why the best and brightest are leaving this community and leaving WL to function with those who have either gave up, or want to be a big fish in a small toxic pond.
"Of course, if WL Staff are looking at it, it only stands to reason that they'll keep existing services where they're at"
And here's exactly why you will never get any respect, nor be elected. If you truly beleive management at City Hall is not interested in running their business as efficiently as possible you are way out of whack. In my experience almost all senior city staffers, in every city I've been in, do everything in their power to ensure maximumization of taxpayer dollars. They are often limited in their ability to affect significant change by Union Collective Bargaining Agreements and mostly by service commitments made by COUNCIL.
You continue to prove you really have no idea how City's work, nor show any respect for people's integrity.
You love to talk about "morale" at City Hall...can you imagine the morale if a Councilor valued city staff as much as you do got in??
Look, nobody including Steve I'm sure wants to see anyone loose their jobs.
Perhaps this position as well as others should not have been created in the first place.
I feel badly for anyone loosing their job, but we can not keep adding at the expense of the taxpayer. At some point raising taxes will put many citizens, especially seniors, in a position where they can no longer afford to stay in their own homes. Do you realize that every position added and ever dollar spent at city hall increases the amount of taxes we pay? Do you think about the low income renters that see their apartment rent increase every time the city increases it's property taxes or water and sewer fees? It does get passed on you know. Why do you think rental rates are so high in this city? Ever think it's because our taxes are so high?
Do you feel bad for these other people we never talk about or does that not affect you because your fortunate enough to have one of these highly paid jobs?
Why is everyone getting so defensive of staff at city hall? I haven't seen anything Steve said that states all or any city staff are doing a bad job. He just wants cost controlled for the good of the taxpayer. Correct me if I'm wrong Steve.
Steve and other potential councillors should cater to the taxpayer first. If that means trimming fat at city hall........good!
Again as the poster above noted, I also do not enjoy seeing people loose a job, but we can't cater to city staff to the point that it affects the taxpayer at large just because they are going to work with them.
If some posters here suggest that city hall staff should be increased and costs not subject to review just because our elected officals need to work with them is criminal.
As in every workplace these days there are many hard working men and women. We all just have to do more with less and that includes city hall!
Thanks all of your comments...
Anonymous #3 and 4 speak for me in this case... I don't like seeing people lose their jobs but when times get tight then tough choices need to be made... because when money is spent, we need to recall the ability of our local taxpayers' to sustain that spending
As for the rest - if elected, I expect Staff to maintain the professional relationship that is required in our local government system. If Staff don't like what I advocate for... I don't lose sleep over it. That is why I was elected... the only people I worry about are the voters... plain and simple...
Steve
No one is suggesting council "cater" to anybody. My objection is Steve's cavalier dismissal of someone as if it's just a line on the budget. Of course staff, like any other expense, needs to be kept in check.
And no one suggested they shouldn't be subjected to review.
Finally, , Jim is right Steve. I wouldn't ever plan on getting a spit-free glass of water at City Hall if I were you.
You've spent years bashing hard working, dedicated people. The chickens will come home to roost if you were ever elected. Luckily, you won't so you can keep on bashing these people on the Internet full time. Is that fulfilling for you?
So you expect them to remain professional when you're a jerk. Lucky for you they're better people than you are.
Anonymous #5:
Thank you for your comment... I don't agree with the premise of your statement or that of "Jim".. guess we'll see what happens Saturday and move forward from there... but do get out and vote, regardless of whom you support of the 3 Mayoral Candidates and 14 Councillor Candidates...
Steve
once again steve you have no defense for your inane comments, never have, never will. You have no concept that things arent black and white, and while you try and "armchair quarterback" by making some outright inflamatory statements, all you do is make the public aware that all you do is complain, and complainers arent innovators steve, plain and simple.
When you propogate these conspiracy theories about staff not investigating due to vested interests, it IS THEIR VESTED INTEREST to find inefficiencies and identify them so, the bigger picture (read JOBS) can be kept.
But what do i know.....im just a measly blogger....and on the internet you can say alot, and answer verrrrry little, right steve.
what a nice double standard we have here. Steve is not allowed to give his opinions about cost control because it is a real person that may be affected at city hall but all you people are allowed to stoop so low as to make fun of Steve and his political aspirations, etc for no reason other than you don't agree with his views and that is okay? This is not grade 1! Lets have an honest discussion and get rid of the personal attacks!!! If you don't agree with his opinion, state your reason why you don't, what you would like to do or see and leave it at that.
I personally share a lot of his views and think the reason he and others do not want to keep spending money like it's going out of style is for the good of the taxpayer and community. Thats what a good councillor and mayor should be doing! The city should not be the biggest employer around. If it becomes that way we are all in big trouble.
I would love to see more people like Steve in a councillors position and wish you nothing but the best of luck!!
A prior poster commented:
"When you propogate these conspiracy theories about staff not investigating due to vested interests, it IS THEIR VESTED INTEREST to find inefficiencies and identify them so, the bigger picture (read JOBS) can be kept."
I also don't believe that city staff should investigate all their own inefficiencies. Yes I do believe that most city staff work hard and try to have the taxpayers best interest at heart. I also believe many have and will continue to find better and more efficient ways to do things. Thank you! I however don't believe most or any staff would come forward and say Jane/John who sits at the desk beside me is not needed as their job could easily be done by another staff member or mayor/councilors themselves. (Ex:Executive assistant or whatever her proper job description is)
The job of finding these inefficiencies, however unplesant, must be done for the good of the taxpayer as it will ruin our city financially if not kept in check.
Brian Carruthers and Kerry Cook had no problem getting rid of staff as soon as Cook was elected.All under the guise of cutting costs. Only to replace some of the positions directly or indirectly later. NOw people complain because Steve made mention of a position being considered in support of cutting costs. Carruthers got rid of people because he did not like them...he and Cook built a little clique and if you didn't fit the image you were disposed of with no consideration. Oh and at a huge cost to the taxpayers. Brian Carruthers is a consumate speaker who could charm the skin off a snake so he got away with it, just as he has managed to get the taxpayers to pay for his schooling at the cost of over thousands of dollars.\So all you "anonymous" coming down on Steve at least he is not afraid to break with the norm and state what needs to be stated.
I don't care who gets in as Mayor and Council as long as who ever does has a good hard look at Brian Carruthers and his spending and time away from the office. This is money not well spent and he must be gone!!!!
Steve's agenda is, and always has been 'get rid of Cook'. And why? Because he is a Nelson pawn. Unfortunately for Steve, he has never understood that. He is now Nelson's mouthpiece on Facebook and now, Steve's comments about City staff, and other City financial issues are no longer based on his beliefs, only on the result of this weekend's vote getting. At one time, I read this blog to get community information, now it is a gossip site full of bs and Steve's constant chit chat about everything negative thing he can find to continue 'buddying up with the boys.' I will NEVER read this blog again and hope that the voters are smart enough to read through all the bs that is out there.
One more thing. If this city does not understand that having a council full of people who are in business together is a CONFLICT then ... we are living in times that are beyond comprehension.
Anonymous @ 11:14
Scott Nelson must truly have lots of time on his hands if he is behind all of Steve's posts as you suggest.
Ever think that maybe he,and many others, that support Scott or Walt just don't approve of Mayor Cooks approach? Just because he shares similar views and supports Scott OVERALL platform publicly does not necessarily mean he is his pawn and agrees with everything he says. Thats my take anyway.
Perhaps you Kerry's pawn as you post on here in defence of her? Or perhaps you are Kerry?
Does anyone really think that owning an apartment or two with someone really sways that persons overall view as councillor/mayor?
If yes, then maybe we should also be asking which councillor/mayor candidates have met socially for dinner or which ones attend church together. In my view one is just like the other.
Maybe we should go one step further and ask which senior managers at the city vacation together, as this could sway city direction just as much as the elected officials.
No, lol I am not Kerry. I am pretty sure that if she has ever bothered to look at this blog, she, like a number of people, have made the pledge to ignore it.
Steve is doing the work posting on Nelson's site for him, I didn't say Scott is behind the posts, I would imagine all the mayoral candidates have better things to do than update their facebook pages, but usually it is family or friends that are familiar with facebook, not fellow candidates.
An apartment or two? And vacationing together is a far cry from being in business together.
Dang it - this site is like a highway accident, can't stop looking even though it makes you shudder.
Enlighten me then. What other business are then in together? From the debate at TRU Jacobson, Bouchard and Kandola's wife (From my recollection) were the only ones to say they were in "business" with a mayor (Presumbly Nelson) or another councillor.
From the disclosure documents filed by all hopefulls I can only see that some of these people own a few rental properties togeter, which you claimed are "a far cry from being in business together"
What other business are they in?
In my humble opinion, having other political hopefulls attend the same church, have social nights out or senior staff vacation together is as much or more of an issue than owning a rental property with someone.
Owning a property such as this at least gives you a vested interest in seeing this commuity prosper. Others just want to make city hall their little empire because they can never accomplish anything any other way.
Again, just my opinion.
Post a Comment