Public Consultation ? HUMBUG !

City councillors are occupying their next few evenings attending special interest suck-up sessions, otherwise known as "public consultation" -- the idea being that the public is given the opportunity to comment on the city's proposed budget prior to its adoption.

Citizen Ellie attended a couple of these affairs during last year's budget process and came away so disgusted with the whole thing that she just had to take up blogging.

Councillors greeted the special interest presentations with ears pricked up and eyes wide open. But let an ordinary taxpayer take the microphone and seek for relief from incessant spending, eyes glazed over, papers were shuffled and pencils were rolled back and forth -- sending a clear message to the ordinary taxpayer that his/her pleas were falling on deaf ears.

The special interest types were well-prepared. Many had statements printed in large type on cards which they read out when their turn came at the microphone. Many speakers represented the same special interest. Interesting though -- when these folk were asked to explain something or expand on their statements by one of the councillors or city officials in attendance, they couldn't do it. Instead, these special interest group trained seals (who turn up at every budget meeting) repeated the statement which they'd already read out. Citizen Ellie wondered who had prepared the statements, printed up the cards and coached the trained seals. City employees who might suffer dire consequences if council decided to give taxpayers a break and do some cutting ? The mystery remains to this day.

There are many in this city who have genuine needs. But there are also many who adopt the view that they are "entitled " to pick your pocket. They have all sorts of swell ideas about how your hard-earned dollars should be spent. It is from among this group that the socialist cadre on city council derive much of their support.

Take Councillor Alex Cullen's idea that no one who performs a job for the city (whether employed directly by the city or employed by a contractor working for the city) should be paid less than $13.75 per hour. Councillor Cullen put forward this idea earlier this year. In the past couple of weeks, an anti-poverty group known as ACORN, was promoting the same idea. Is it just a coincidence that ACORN's municipal minimum wage position should see the light of day at the same time budget deliberations are under way ?

And what do we know about ACORN ? It's an American outfit that has opened a branch plant in Ottawa. If you followed last year's U-S presidential election, you'd know that ACORN was credited with Barack Obama's election sucess. Indeed, ACORN was President Obama's favorite special interest group -- until some enterprising journalists, equipped with hidden cameras and microphones, walked into a couple of ACORN offices in different U-S cities to discover just what the organization was doing with the tax dollars the organization received for job creation and the like. According to news items about the "sting" which appeared on CNN, FOX News and other media outlets, ACORN job creation counsellors didn't flinch when asked how one could get funding to establish a stable of call girls, not to mention setting up a brothel. They just went ahead and gave advice on how to do it.

Once this juicy stuff hit the media, the ACORN apologist was trotted trotted out -- there would be an investigation, there would be firings, heads most certainly would roll and it was all a plot by conservative, family-values Republicans anyway! It would appear, however, that President Obama has backed away from ACORN, just as he backed away from his long-time pastor, Rev. Josiah Little. President Obama has no time for political liabilities.

If city council wants to save money and give taxpayers a break, it should take a look at a couple of departments where salary/benefit costs are high. The city solicitor's department, for instance. One would think the lawyers employed by the city would be expert in property and contract law. Why then, during the full council's debate on the Lansdowne Live project which, after all, was a property matter, was it necessary to bring in three high-priced lawyers from Borden, Ladner, Gervais LLP to advise council during the process ? If council has no faith in the city's own lawyers, then why bother to maintain a legal department ? Instead, every time a legal issue comes up, retain a lawyer from Borden, Ladner, Gervais. Probably would be cheaper in the long run. No employee benefits, no pension obligations.

Same thing goes for the planning branch. Seems it's necessaryto bring in outside consultants every time the city is involved in a major project. So why maintain a planning staff if second-guessing by consultants is necessary before council approves a plan ? To the person on the outside looking in, it would appear that council has absolutely no faith in its own employees. So why does the "sunshine list" grow longer each year ? That too is a mystery which needs solving.

An Apology

No I was not stricken with H1N1. The fact I haven't posted in a couple of weeks is due in some part to certain obligations which go along with the holiday season when one has a family and is also involved in volunteer activities in the community. I've also had to deal with a major piece of unpleasantness -- my cottage at Lac McFee, Que. was broken into for the second time within an 18-month period. As there was nothing of value left to steal, the criminals resorted to vandalism. I'm not a spring chicken any more and after much soul-searching, I concluded the best course of action would be to put the place on the market and say au revoir to la belle province. So to my loyal bl-eaders, sorry. I'm back -- at least until mid-January when I am off to Phoenix to get all the info on their LRT system, including what the good citizens of that city have learned about how much it costs to run LRT dependent on electricity.

New posts usually on Fridays