Sigh! I hate to lose, but there was a good turnout, close to the numbers for our last municipal. Besides, it was impossible to get worked up about the vote results on Plan A when standing in the lobby of the Council Chambers looking through the bank of windows at the snow falling. I could not avoid thinking of all the people I know who would be out on the streets, homeless and trying to survive the night. Not to mention all the city’s homeless that I don’t know, but who also share the city’s streets and face the challenge of surviving the weather. Standing there watching the snow fall and remembering last year when I was on the same streets – let’s just say that it tends to put losing a vote about what are ultimately luxuries for the better off of our city’s citizens in a very different perspective.

This difference in viewpoint was driven home during a conversation with a member of city council. We were shaking hands about the outcome when I commented that I could not help thinking more about those on our city streets than I could dwell on the vote outcome. Just then the council member’s spouse came up to us and stated “that it was very nice that the “pretty” snow was falling on a weekend when it could be “enjoyed” without causing major problems”. In light of our conversation the council member winced at their spouse’s comment. This conversation did underscore the different perspective one gains when one has experienced the streets. It also underlines the willful ignorance of so many of Abbotsford’s citizens. That the spouse of a council member is so unable to see the cruel reality of Abbotsford’s streets, says something about the attitude of council, senior city staff and the citizenry at large.

We are willing to spend $85,000,000+ on buildings to play in, while others wander the city streets. Oh, I forgot – that is somebody else’s responsibility so we can ignore our neighbours plight. The city spent $300,000+ on consultants, $250,000+ on the referendum, $30,000+ (such as city workers on overtime putting back up YES signs blown down) and $60,000+ donated from supporters – but the city has not a penny to spare for those in desperate need.

We had better pay careful attention to taking a look at our values or we will find ourselves, a few years from now, a city with three fancy new buildings – and no more soul than our current behaviours demonstrate. The true worth of a City as a place to live is not in its nice buildings and the amusements it provides for residents, but in its soul and the values the community lives by.

The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win,
you’re still a rat. Lily Tomlin

It became very obvious that the reason that I could not get a clear idea of exactly what it is that council and city staff are proposing we build for facilities is because council and city staff have NO CLEAR IDEA of what exactly it is they will build. The know the types of facilities (entertainment center, recreation complex and art gallery/museum), they have a wish lists of what they want in those facilities (eg. Basketball court, ice surface) and they have a price they propose to pay. But as to what exactly the city will get for spending all that money – they have no idea.

They will tell you that this is because it makes no sense to spend money to come up with any kind of actual plans or hard numbers because it would be wasted if the plan was turned down. They would rather spend those dollars on a high pressure sales campaign than developing actual ideas and plans they could present to the public so they had layouts and numbers of a real nature for the public. They would appear to be so lacking in vision and leadership that vague generalities and snake-oil salesmanship is their way of operating on this and many other pressing issues facing Abbotsford.

In a nutshell they planning/proposing to put out their building types, wish lists and the price they will pay in what is referred to as design/build. They seek offers to build a facility at that price. The company then designs and builds the building. You know what it is you paid for and are getting when they are finished. You better hope their vision of the wish list and what a, say, entertainment complex looks like are reasonable close to what you thought you were getting/wanted/needed.

As I said lacking vision and leadership. If you believe that the City needs facilities you make that part of your platform at election time. You do not avoid this subject to get elected, so that you can then use access to taxpayer money, city staff and facilities to steamroll vague promises and proposals over any opposition by denying their rights of free speech and answers to questions and fool the public into thinking they have a good idea of what the final shape of these facilities will be, when nobody knows or has a good idea what the final structure will be.

You present your vision, your reasoning and your plans in the public forum and more level playing field of a municipal election. You design the facilities, hiring reputable engineers and architects; you come up with business plans, projected income or losses at which point you present this information to the citizens. Then you listen to them. The concerns are addressed or you explain why you are not going to address a particular point. Listening is the key, they have a right to be heard, to present their views and above all they have a right to access city facilities in presenting their views to their fellow citizens.
City Staff and Council are so use to ignoring citizens that even at a session they claimed was for public questions to be answered they repeatedly gave answers that did not answer the question asked by a citizen/taxpayer. Which may help to explain their time limit on questions – it provides an excuse to avoid those pesky follow up questions if the citizen tries to insist the City answer the actual question posed. Especially when the moderator is one of the city staff selling these mirages to the public.

They have no interest in explaining why the management fees paid to Global Spectrum to manage the facility are apparently not considered an expense by the city since in answering questions about operating costs, they failed to include fees paid to Global Spectrum in the entertainment facility costs. But then they also chose to ignore maintenance and upkeep costs for the facility. Perhaps they plan on using they profits they choose to imagine for the complex to pay fees, maintenance and upkeep. Which raises the question: if big profits are such a sure-fire guarantee, why is it that Global Spectrum wants a management fee? Should they, since the company speaks so blithely about big profits be rewarded via a profit sharing plan? If they are promising profits and the city is depending on a profit, should not Global Spectrum have the incentive of being compensated out of any profits, profits net of all operating and maintenance costs? Should Global Spectrum, based on their promises and assurances of profit share with the city’s taxpayers the risk that there will in fact be no profits?

It was fascinating to learn that Councilor Beck, through words out of his own mouth, sees no difference between an Abbotsford citizen and taxpayer who questions the wisdom of proceeding with such vague plans for unneeded facilities while needed facilities go un-built – and an American company wanting to build SE2 and pollute our air-shed. Personally I have no idea what this comparison was meant to mean, you will have to ask Councilor Beck. I suppose this insult should have come as no surprise in light of the distain and disregard the council and city staff has shown for anyone who would dare question their infallibility.

I was amazed to learn that the city has a fairy godmother? Leprechaun? whom magically fills and refills the reserve fund. How else is it that taking money out of the reserve fund is not spending taxpayers money – at least according to city staff and council. After all, when asked if the cost of the land should not be included in the proposed entertainment complex the question was told “No, it came out of the reserve fund” and thus was not an expense. Which begs the questions: Where exactly does this money come from if not from the taxpayers?; If it does come from taxpayers, does that not mean that buying the land was an expense paid out by taxpayers? And just how bad is the city staff’s and council’s grasp on basic financial principals that they see money in and out of the reserve as magical not revenue/expense in nature?

It is clear that what staff and council have is labels such as “entertainment complex” and wish lists but no definitive plans for the proposed facility. So what it comes down to is handing them a blank cheque for $85 million and hoping/praying. I was talking to a non-senior (pity!) staff member who was willing to listen and discuss ideas, questions and Reality about Plan A. S/he was correct what the city’s Plan A boils down to is blind faith. I just cannot support turning all that money over to a group I would not trust to build an outhouse. So I must vote NO.

At the UCFV Plan A meeting it was very clear that Councilor John Smith, with his ties to UCFV, badly wants University status for UCFV and believes (as do many) that the entertainment complex is necessary part of UCFV’s bid for University status. The problem? As a city councilor Mr. Councilor Smith is in a position to have exerted undue influence on the entire process, from the “surveys” and “consultations” to the current slick high-pressure sales campaign.

Slanted survey questions and design; selected groups and persons to “consult”; influence and/or pressure to ensure the entertainment complex was chosen to build; a backroom deal to obtain the land from its owner; reasons found to build next to UCFV and nowhere else; pressure and promises to elicit support and backing.

Did all of this happen, some of this or none of this? We will never know, but we do know Councilor Smith was part of the process from beginning to end.

Ethical behaviour demands that someone with such a powerful Conflict of Interest, a position of influence and multiple opportunities to exert undue influence on the process and outcome declare that they are in a position of great conflict of interest, and then place wide distance between themselves and every aspect of the process use in arriving at the recommended projects.

They most certainly should not be acting as both booster of UCFV’s bid for University status, as one of the architects of Plan A and one of the slick, taxpayer funded, high-pressure salesmen for the very project(s) at the core of this Conflict of Interest.

Councilor Smith’s actions upon being in both a Conflict of Interest and a position to exert undue influence jeopardizes not only UCFV’s application for University status, but taints the entire Plan A process. The only way to cauterize this grievous wound to Abbotsford’s integrity is to start again at the beginning and carry out the entire process in a fully public and transparent way OR with a resounding and overwhelming NO vote on November 25, 2006.