General Manager Economic Development and Planning Services Jay Teichroeb had this to say about the referendum on the proposed P3 water project:
“It’s important that the public understands what is in front of them. It is not an either/or question … The choice is the model proposed or nothing,” said Teichroeb.
That means the public either says yes to the P3 water supply or no. The traditional design/build is not one of the options. He said if people don’t understand this then “we have not served the community.”
“It is the best of 19 potential options we examined, and were closely analyzed by teams of engineers and financial experts.”
If the public says no to the P3 proposal, Teichroeb said the city would have to “limit new development” and “use water rates to create a financial motivation to conserve.”
If this was the best of 19 options that city staff could come up with, it is time to do a thorough housecleaning and hire some competent staff.
If Mr Teichroeb actually believes what he says above and is not merely using threats, intimidation and scare tactics (old favourites of City Hall staff, mayor and council) to stampede taxpayers into panicking and doing what staff, the mayor and council want them to – vote for the excessively expensive, flawed and problematic system, the City’s inept P3 proposal – that would explain why the City derives at best minimal benefit from the $892,000 it budgeted for Economic Development and Planning Services.
Rather than accepting Mr Teichroeb’s Chicken Little ‘the sky is falling’ routine let us proceed in the matter Mr Teichroeb, city staff, mayor and council clearly don’t want the public to, by thinking about what he said rather than being intimidated.
“The choice is the model proposed or nothing,” It is not “ or nothing,” It is a choice of overpaying for a flawed and problematic system by $100,000,000+ (a Hundred Million Plus dollars – a phenomenal waste of taxpayer dollars even by current staff, mayor and council’s standards of waste, waste, waste) OR saying ‘enough’ and demanding a financially responsible and operationally sound plan for upgrading the Abbotsford/Mission water supply system.
“we have not served the community.” OK, I cannot dispute that. Plan A and the numerous costs staff and council were aware of and did not reveal to the public until after the referendum; Plan A with its massive cost overruns; not obeying the law (Community Charter) which was designed to protect taxpayers from being saddled with multi-million dollar subsidies to private business, which staff, mayor and council worked to circumvent so they could burden already overburdened taxpayers with ten years of million(s of) dollar(s) subsidies to the Heat’s owners; usury fees for the use of city facilities to subsidize a professional hockey team; and so on and so on….
Clearly Mr Teichroeb is correct in stating “we have not served the community.”
“It is the best of 19 potential options we examined, and were closely analyzed by teams of engineers and financial experts.”
The public is certainly entitled to have a list of the 19 options as part of evaluating the “best of the 19 options.” It is vital to a proper evaluation of the options for the public to have the list of names of those who were members of the “teams of engineers and financial experts.” and their analysis.
Please none of this ‘we cannot give out the names’ usual city claptrap and excuse mongering. Unless the City is saying the members of these “ teams of engineers and financial experts.” are not willing to stand behind their analysis. Which would inform the public just what that analysis is worth – nada, nothing, less than the paper it was written on.
The public is entitled to the 19 options, the names of the engineers and financial experts and the analysis of each of the 19 options. Or Mr Teichroeb’s resignation.
“If the public says no to the P3 proposal, …… the city would have to “limit new development” and “use water rates to create a financial motivation to conserve.”
Really? This is the best staff, mayor and council can come up with? They are going to take their ball and go home and sulk?
Clearly, if giving up and sulking is the best option that city staff, the mayor and council could come up with, it is time to do a thorough housecleaning and hire some competent staff and elect a competent and effective mayor and council
On November 19th, save your pocketbook and Abbotsford’s water future.
Vote NO to the P3 – another mayor and council debacle in the making.
Vote YES to elect James W Breckenridge. You can examine James W Breckenridge’s proposed approach to upgrading the water infrastructure at: http://www.jameswbreckenridge.ca/?p=2176 http://www.jameswbreckenridge.ca/?p=2176
Feedback and ideas are welcome. I never have met a good/better idea I was not willing to….ummmmmm….adopt.