Municipal, Snafu

Aesthetically Pleasing?

Leave a comment

Just how does one make a 10 X 20 foot electronic sign that is designed to be obtrusive and get your attention ‘aesthetically pleasing’?

And given that electronic signs have two sides would it not be more accurate to say Abbotsford is getting six signs? Or at least getting the visual pollution of six signs?

“stems the proliferation”?

To stem is ‘to stop, check or restrain’. I am not aware of the city being inundated with this type of visual pollution or of any proposals to visually pollute our cityscape with eye assaulting electronic billboards?

Council’s actions would seem to encourage others to consider the money to be made from this visual pollution; encouraging, not stemming the proliferation of visual pollution around our cityscape.

The attempt to use Amber alert as a justification is facetious since there are already signs on Highway One and around Abbotsford capable of giving an Amber alert.

No, what this is about is Council’s desperate search for sources of revenue so they can continue their spendthrift ways.

Business as usual for Council were it is all about Council’s wants and needs and ‘who cares about’ the wants or needs of Abbotsford’s citizens.

Council is suppose to focus on managing Abbotsford in the best interests of citizens, not on commercial business ventures.

The question that should have been asked is not how much money the city can make, but whether we want this type of visual pollution sprouting up like weeds around  Abbotsford.

While other cities in BC fight to protect their citizens from this type of visual pollution Abbotsford council, with dollar signs glowing in their eyes, happily sell Abbotsford’s citizens out; opening the door to visual pollution the extent of which only time will reveal.

Abbotsford, where the cityscape is littered with brightly glaring Signs of Council’s mismanagement and blatant disregard for the needs and best interests of Abbotsford citizens.

Provincial

So Bill, Adrian…

Leave a comment

On the Monday (August 29th) news there were calls for BC Community Living to find money to keep care homes for the developmentally challenged open. Over the weekend there were calls for the government to find the money to open the top two floors at Vernon Jubilee Hospital’s new tower. Earlier this year there was a call to find the $10s of millions needed to build a new hospital on Haida Gwaii.

Calls by BC citizens, the media, the NDP for the government to spend more funds are a daily (or near daily) occurrence.

Yet with media acting as cheer leaders and Mr Vander Zalm, along with Mr Dix (and his NDP), acting as Svengalis – British Columbians voted to extinguish the HST and rip $2.6 to $3 billion out of government coffers over the next three and a half years.

On the heels of the announcement of the results of the vote, completely ignoring (refusing to accept?) the serious financial consequences of extinguishing the HST, British Columbians, the media, the NDP are all back calling for the government to ‘find the money’.

Perhaps, rather than patting themselves on the back or running around thanking people for helping them  extinguish the HST, Mr Vander Zalm and Mr Dix (and his NDP) will finally share with the public what $1.6 billion worth of  health care and education services they want to cut to offset the $1.6 billion repayment (forfeiture) to Ottawa they fought so hard and successfully for? Or the cuts they favour to offset the $1 billion revenue reduction in the first two years of the return to the PST?

Cuts to services, since Mr Vander Zalm, Mr Dix (and his NDP) fought so hard to extinguish the GST because it ‘raised taxes’ so one would not expect them to want to raise taxes to cover these massive revenue shortfalls.

Why speak only of cuts to healthcare and education? Because even drastic actions such as cutting all the gaming grants given to organizations in the province or cutting subsidies to BC Ferries and forcing them to balance their books through service cuts are  simply too small to achieve a re-balancing of the budget without significant reductions in healthcare  services and  education. Healthcare and education being the only budget areas large enough to provide the Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in cuts needed.

Not that I am opposed to making as many smaller cuts as possible to offset the revenue forfeitures Mr Vander Zalm, Mr Dix and the NDP so successfully (and disasterously) fought for.

I am very much in favour of eliminating the government pensions of Mr Vander Zalm, Mr Dix and the NDP as well as cutting the salaries of current NDP MLA’s to $32,667 (1/3 of their current $98,000). Since the behaviour of Mr. Dix and the NDP MLAs clearly demonstrates their outrageous salaries and gold plated pensions have resulted in them being totally out of touch with the economic and financial reality of British Columbia and most British Columbians

The leadership Mr Vander Zalm, Mr Dix and the NDP showed in extinguishing the HST, should be shown in living with the consequences.

It is just unfortunate that those consequences cannot not be limited to Mr Vander Zalm, Mr Dix, the NDP, the media and those British Columbians who voted to extinguish the HST – but will instead fall on, and be suffered by, all British Columbians.

Municipal, Snafu

More ad hominem mayor Peary?

Leave a comment

I see mayor Peary has changed the negative label he applies to any who dare disagree with him.

‘Naysayers’ have now become ‘critics’. Perhaps because the use of ‘naysayers’ reminds citizens that the predictions of the naysayers about the outcome and consequences of building the AESC have proven fairly accurate. Especially in contrast to the wildly inaccurate ‘everything will be wonderful’ predictions, claims and promises made by city staff and council.

When did critical review and evaluation of expenditures that will cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars become a bad thing?

Without the feedback provided by critical review and evaluation companies, countries, provinces and municipalities can easily end up wasting millions upon millions of dollars on projects that become white elephants and money pits. At least companies, countries, provinces and municipalities lacking papal infallibility.

Admittedly one needs solid self esteem to accept and examine the feedback provided by critical review, acknowledging oversights or mistakes and making changes as needed.

Personally, I must acknowledge that in my analysis and evaluation of the proposal to build the AESC I did not foresee that council would saddle taxpayers with a $75 million dollar liability for the Heat (of which $60 million remains for the 8 years the revenue guarantee has left).

Fortunately (or should that be unfortunately?) taxpayers are only out $5 – $6 – $7 million rather than the maximum possible $15 million for the first two years of the revenue guarantee.

I admit I failed entirely to anticipate that council would ignore the law – flout the law -break the law – and put taxpayers at risk for $75 million dollars by signing an illegal revenue guarantee with the Heat ownership.

As to Mayor Peary’s latest derogatory term for those who disagree with him:

Labelling me a critic or naysayer does not change what I am.

A person of common sense with an appreciation of financial reality and the need to act in a financially responsible manner.

A person who believes council should be acting in the best interest of and to address the needs of the city and its citizens and not council’s ego.

A person of ethics who believes that when subsidizing a hockey team is against the law council should respect the law rather than, as this council chose,  ignoring or finding ways to circumvent the law.

A person who feels that if the only benefit (or beneficiaries) of an economic impact report is the re-election campaign(s) of elected officials, payment for the report should come out of the pockets of those seeking re-election and not out of the pockets of taxpayers.