Did you feel the pain
Or will you shrug it off as not noticing. A comment made by the Deputy Mayor "The average householder will not notice it (a $49 yearly tax increase)" may come back and haunt him, it may not but what it does demonstrate is a complete lack of sympathy, empathy and condolence with joe taxpayer.
This budget is a lost opportunity to establish contact with the citizens. In this time of crisis we need to know that the rulers understand our pain. Unfortunately the council members, the majority of whom sit on indexed pensions, have felt the need for business as usual. The missed opportunity was the decision not to have a zero tax increase. Cutting $441,605 out of a budget that is $18.400,219 would not appear to be that difficult. Not all programmes are deemed to be life threatening and those are the programmes that we should be funding, others should be pared. But we do not know what programmes were on the chopping block, if any because the public was not informed of the consequences of a zero-based budget. I am sure if you told each councillor that $441,605 had to be taken out of the budget you would have had seven different responses. Ask the taxpayer and you would have had many more. Budgeting is not easy but in the absence of transparency it becomes harder for the public to accept it.
And to slough it off by presuming that the average householder would not notice it is irresponsible and arrogant. Unfortunately by saying it the DM has made himself look that way!
This budget is a lost opportunity to establish contact with the citizens. In this time of crisis we need to know that the rulers understand our pain. Unfortunately the council members, the majority of whom sit on indexed pensions, have felt the need for business as usual. The missed opportunity was the decision not to have a zero tax increase. Cutting $441,605 out of a budget that is $18.400,219 would not appear to be that difficult. Not all programmes are deemed to be life threatening and those are the programmes that we should be funding, others should be pared. But we do not know what programmes were on the chopping block, if any because the public was not informed of the consequences of a zero-based budget. I am sure if you told each councillor that $441,605 had to be taken out of the budget you would have had seven different responses. Ask the taxpayer and you would have had many more. Budgeting is not easy but in the absence of transparency it becomes harder for the public to accept it.
And to slough it off by presuming that the average householder would not notice it is irresponsible and arrogant. Unfortunately by saying it the DM has made himself look that way!
11 comments:
Unfortunately, your preferred candidate for DM did the opposite, said nothing - in my slanted opinion, that's just as bad!
... and another thing! Brocanier's dissertation on the "minimal increase" was so flawed, the part I could make out anyway, that it needs to be critiqued and exposed for its ignorance and lack of understanding of taxation based on assessments. However, to be fair about it, we need the full and accurate text as he delivered it before that critique can be exercised properly. If that text is available, please post it right here.
Manfred, my preferred candidate - on the sitting council
ben
"I was at the council meeting and what Brocanier said was confusing. I was hoping that it would be cleared up in the paper, but it wasn't. I assumed that there would be a coherent written statement, but I guess assuming made an ass out of me.
It was also amusing to hear the deputy mayor, the treasurer and the CAO all give conflicting answers to Miriam's question about reserve accounts.
I regret that we do not seem to have coordinated competent financial management, but I knew that."
Anonymous almost got it perfect, except for the part about answering Miriam's question. What was offered in response was not answering the question being asked. Even the mayor recognized the sound of a drowning man flailing and thrashing in the sea of data so he asked the Treasurer to offer his explanation. Mr. Davey was kind enough to not embarass the DM further by giving a proper answer, but unfortunately that left the actual question unanswered.
Can someone enlighen me about what the kerfuffle is now concerning Mutton? She has apparently refused to apologise for something but I don't know what.
Has she finally found her back bone? I shouldn't be too critical I guess, it must take a lot of effort to sit there week after week being treated like a child. I would have bone beserk a long time ago.
DJO
Greg Hancock wrote:"In the end it came out that some of the town's reserve funds are in deficit, one to the tune of $2 million. Also the reserve funds are only an accounting entry, so that when the town says it is using reserves to purchase and item it does not actually have those funds in cash, so really it becomes an extra charge on the taxpayer. The idea that things bought from reserve funds are free is totally misleading."
Greg
During earlier discussions about the makeup of the committee struck to assess the bids for the engineering consultants contract, Miriam asked if there had been any disclosures, or was there a need for any disclosures, concerning potential conflict of interests on the part of any members of the committee. One would deduce from her question that she had wind of some questionable choices and at one time she questioned if there was any kind of possible connection between any member of the committee and any one in the employment, at some point, of one of the firms bidding for the contract. Both McCaughey and Brocanier took exception to her questions and spoke at council about it, with McCaughey demanding a formal apology from her. Miriam flew off the handle and told McCaughey in no uncertain terms that he was "the last person on earth in a position to demand such an apology!" to which McCaughey put his tail between his legs and sat down. Before that skirmish, Brocanier asked for an apology, Miriam did not respond directly, the mayor asked Miriam if she was prepared to offer an apology and she emphatically stated that she was not prepared to do so. In that moment of nothingness, McCaughey made his embarrassing stab at it.
So the question is, "Who on Council knows something that other members should know about and who is not admitting to what they know?"
Very interesting and until somebody says something then the question will still linger!
Apologize for asking a question?
Really?
That's it?
McCaughey & Brocanier all touchy?
Just because of a question?
Awww, the poor widdle counciwwors?
Did anyone spot them going into the washroom to have a cry?
Post a Comment