The next big meeting

On Tuesday evening there is a meeting to hear about the plan, and how the County intends, to dispose of our local Police Service. Before all the new people to Town and those taxfighters amongst us get worked up about somebody daring to buck convention, by not accepting at face value the report prepared for the County lets look at the other side. Here is a copy of the remarks I intend to deliver at the Policing meeting on Wednesday evening. These remarks centre on three topics, one of which is the dubious savings calculations. The basic assumption made by realists is that the premise that the major portion of savings will come from new grants, that the urban municipalities will now qualify for, because somehow they have become Rural by joining in a large geographical area. These grants are not guaranteed and the programme is due for review in 2008.

The other point is that without grants and Police rebates, which are really compensatory sums of money given back to the municipalities for services not received, Cobourg's savings are zilch and the costs to go to the OPP will cost us a couple of million.

The last point is the important one. It does not matter how Cobourg and Port Hope vote on this issue, the Rurals can outvote us! A simple majority of votes can see our Police Services taken away from us, even the weighted voting cannot help us. And to rub salt into our wounds the way the Police costs have been calculated the rurals are using our savings to outvote us. As noted last week the savings calculations have been worked out in a non-traditional manner. The County percentage billing system, used in every other County programme, has been tossed aside in favour of a perversion called, "Fee for Service with Rural Adjustments"

So if you are remotely interested in any of this topic you should head out to the Lions' Centre on Elgin St. The meeting starts at 7pm but the real stuff gets going after the usual powerpoint bore at about 8.10pm.

The Port Hope Policing Meeting
Last Thursday I attended the Port Hope meeting and listened to the presentations. One hour and ten minutes after the meeting opened the Port Hope council was allowed to ask questions. Frankly I was disappointed with the quality of the questions that the collective councillors asked. In the big scheme of things playing to the local crowd by defending the quality of the Communications department didn't excuse the fact that they are gone.

In fact there were only two sparks. One when Deputy Mayor Jeff Lees asked about PSU rebates and the lack of performance to the contract they indicate and when he pointed out that the million dollars per year screening revenue will be lost. The answer to that was intriguing. "The RCMP is not happy with that information (CPIC) being sold privately." and implied that not only would the OPP be reluctant to screen but the practice may soon be outlawed! The PSU rebate question was answered indignantly and bureaucratically. "We always overestimate and Wellington County got back a million!" In a later answer to the question, "How will we get the screening money back if it goes to the County?" Mr Pyatt replied that Port Hope will get the money back in the County percentage 20%. The questioner quickly calculated that the amount coming back was only $59,000 different from the savings on the charts. His assessment - "For $59,000 folks, it just ain't worth it!"

The grant question was answered by Bill Pyatt who said that an assistant deputy had made the statement about the programme being a McGuinty program and it should stay, it is assumed by all that by just expanding the geographical area we automatically qualify, and that the expansion justifies the extra money going to the rurals.

Watkins was challenged by the Port Hope Police Association and asked if the Morley Hicks quote (this was where MH said that the offer of three years employment to all officers "makes the need for severances "unlikely"") was his or that of MH. Pyatt said that he summarized the 8 page opinion into the para in the report. "Were you aware that some of our provisions and benefits are superior to the OPP? Because if they are we have a case for severance!" replied the rep, Pyatt said that MH had copies of the 2 Collective Agreements (Cobourg & Port Hope) and none of the benefit schedules when they wrote the opinion. Interesting.

As to the question about levels of service, "We will have a police service of 130 of which the County will pay for 109" another memorable quote. As a provincial taxpayer we should be costing that. But it indicates that 109 will not provide the same level of service we are getting now.

So the questions just mount up. I was really surprised that nobody mentioned the fact that Port Hope has no chance in the voting to save what they have.

One more notch on Council's pistol butt

Remember the image of the gunslinger, after he had just killed someone, filing a notch on his pistol butt? Well Cobourg Council's pistol butt has just got another notch on it. I am a little late in reading this but over on Prof. R Washburn's blog, here there is a comment from Dilys Robertson announcing that she intends to resign from the Parks & Rec committee. Sad to see her go but that's exactly what the four old dead guys on Council want to see - dissidents leaving. Unfortunately it will have no real effect on the Council as this Council does only uses the committees as a convenience to them. Outspoken people need not apply.

I have never thanked Dilys properly for her demeanor and poise when faced with the MacDonald bombast and insult. She served the delegation well. I hope we see more of her in the future and that she doesn't hide in the garden instead of getting involved. Thank you Dilys, and Anne Hancock too for not giving up and writing a well-penned letter, calling a spade a spade, last week.

County Forest submissions about ATV use

Sent to me for public interest, if you have an opinion about the ATVs in the forest go to the site.

Dear Friends of the Northumberland Forest At LONG LAST – the County of Northumberland has put up a ‘feedback’ address to allow people to register their comments on the workings of the Northumbelrand County Forest Advisory committee and proposed management plan. Copies of earlier FAC meeting reports apparently will be posted to the site shortly.
You do not need to be logged in as a ‘member’ to post in the ‘feedback’ section.
PLEASE go to this site and make your opinion known!!!

If you want input - you can't have it!!

This police discussion is going to nasty before it gets better. The debate is going to boil down into whether Cobourg can influence it own destiny and how much money are we going to save? Here is a letter that I wrote this week that sums it up

The first issue is where the Council of the day is going to be on the spot, but however much they huff and puff, what they think or do is of no consequence. And that is a democratic crime. For any municipality to lose a chunk of its local culture is wrenching. Sometimes people can't wait to chuck a piece overboard but in this case, the loss of a venerated service - Cobourg historically had a police force before a local council, we don't know what the community wants. But we do want the people of Cobourg to decide!

It will be a crying shame if the debate about the loss of local police service engenders less action than a silly piece of concrete at the harbourfront. Although the issue is the same - can we save money and do we need it. This debate has two aspects, both extremely important: one is the right to determine our own affairs, in other words Cobourg should decide to dissolve the Police Service not have it decided for us by people who don't like us. Secondly we need real facts upon which to judge the argument. The Policing Study penned by an OPP apologist is biased and misleading and many cases just inaccurate - factually wrong.

Given the importance of this subject I anxiously await what Councillor Frost is allowed to tell us - after all he is the coordinator.

Here is the video

At last week's council meeting an interesting interchange of opinions took place. Summarized by others as an exchange between a rude woman delegate and an exasperated councillor. The first video is of the delegation's presentation, which has been judged by some as "rude and sarcastic" others disagree and call it frank and blunt. See it here.

The other video is Councillor MacDonald's response, where he took exception to "allusions of corruption" and other considerations that may only exist in his mind. But he is out of line in his references to a delegation see it here

The OPP guy strikes again

Last Wednesday the County debated a costing report from its Policing consultant. This fellow, a superannuated OPP inspector, has written, not surprisingly, a glowing report about the savings to be achieved if the County was to use the OPP to police the entire County.

Without going into the wisdom of such a move let's look at the report. To do this one has to understand the way policing is funded. Rural communities (the County has five of them) get subsidies for policing (OMPF grants). This was a Mike Harris trick to make it appear that everybody pays for policing costs - it was a sham. They took away the free policing, replaced it with a fee and then gave out grants to offset the fee. Urban municipalities do not qualify for the grants and that's why their policing costs are on average 100% higher than the rurals (Oh did I mention that the standard of response is much lower for the rurals too?).

Mr Watkins has written a report that is of his usual standard, that is slanted to the prevailing feeling, i.e. isn't the OPP good and the others very expensive. Also he has laid himself open to previous allegations of bias with this report as it glosses over a couple of very important items. But back to the report. The really important stuff is on pages 45 to 48 - the costing tables. This is where Cobourg and Port Hope really get screwed.

County services have always been on a shared costing basis, Cobourg has the smallest amount of County roads yet pays the most to maintain the whole system. Cobourg has the most ambulance calls yet doesn't pay a surcharge for it - shared costs based on the County levy. But the recommendation of this report is that Cobourg pays more than the others because of a principle called "Fee for service with rural adjustment" What that means is that Cobourg gets to pour money into the rurals again!

Bottom line is that if the costing was done based on the County levy Cobourg would save $2.6 million and under the recommendation it would only save $1.9 million. Guess where the rest went to? The boonies that's where! Alnwick-Haldimand would see a rise if they paid according to the levy by $259,109 and with the recommendation would save $116.381. In fact in the recommendation calls for all of the municipalities that are now policed by OPP to save money.

So by incorporating urban policing into the rural system all costs go down and the urbans lose savings so how about this suggestion leave the policing costs the same as last year for the rurals and give the urbans the rest of the money.

This report needs a careful examination but some of the information is missing (the present actual police costs for example) and the report has been written in such a way to discourage that examination and presents the case for the switch very well, glossing over the massive problem of severances and collective agreements. After all if the majority is going to get huge cost savings at the expense of the minority who wouldn't vote for it?

So the urbans get screwed again and the boonikins laugh all the way to the bank and in the process the community loses a large part of its local culture. Well wasn't that the idea of the neo-cons - "There is no such thing as community" - Margaret Thatcher. This idea of free policing is one of the last policies of Mike Harris that has to be overturned. And this County wide switch will not do it.

Let's scan the entrails

The election is over - anybody notice it in the first place. What a bore and snoozefest. Snippets below

• Did the Tory campaign ever get off the ground, apart from being sabotaged by the central campaign Cathy Galt's team suffered greatly.
• Firstly the vicious nomination battles split the party and left the Cambellford rump running the party. Unfortunately seven people can't run a party.
• Secondly you have to know where you are going and have some organisation, filing the nomination papers with only three hours to go is a good sign that you either couldn't get 100 people to sign the papers or you were completely disorganised.
  
• The loss of 8 points in the polls now demonstrates that the local riding association has to rebuild but in which direction - Cambellford and the hicks or Cobourg/Port Hope with the Bill Davis leftovers?
  
• Loooo and his fiberals are crowing a lot but why; they had 96 votes less than last time. What a water treader!
• The greens did well getting another 3,181 votes than last time but will they stick or were they POd tory votes, they, the greens, don't care and will float off into lala land thinking that they are on a winning track. I just hope that their new voters don't look at the economic policies or else they will leave as fast as they came.
• The Ndippers also did well, with a very good candidate, getting another 1,371 votes and moving up 2% points over last time.
  

So what can we expect in the next four years? Nothing that hasn't happened over the last four, in other words bland and boring politics that will ignore the real issue of our area. Rising property taxes is the killer issue and nobody is looking to the root cause. Nobody will want to upset the municipal apple cart and dismantle the fiefdoms of Northumberland. Municipal redundancy and duplication is the problem here and we don't solve it by allowing the County to expand a bloated bureaucracy and keep the fiefdoms. New land use policies and planning for the shifting demographic that cannot take up the slack of reduced industrial taxation, caused by the high dollar and deindustrialisation, with their high property taxes and coming user fees, has to take place from the Central government. We know that the Barons of Northumberland (the seven mayoral dwarfs) cannot do this for parochial reasons so Premier McGuinty has do it for them. But he won't and so in four years time the electoral issue will be property tax reform.

This really upsets some people.
The staggered traffic lights at the beer store/No frills corner are perplexing, especially for the drivers sitting behind bozos who don't know how to navigate this large intersection. I even saw one frustrated driver sitting in the Beer Store Rd drive in the outside lane all the way around the other drivers sitting in the Division St lanes just to show the bozos how to get through the intersection. It's simple folks - if you have a green you keep on driving. Perhaps traffic Engineer Ted MacDonald should be stationed at the intersection and be ready to jump into traffic, like a squeegee kid, just to tell the bozo who stops on the red, instead of going on through, what to do. After all wouldn't a "No Left turn" sign positioned in front of the Park St. intersection have done the job of controlling traffic and would have been a lot cheaper than new lights?

This should upset people
MP Garth Turner has published here a story about the Conservative party's data mining operations. Very interesting and bit freaky, the Harpercrits making enemies lists and noting info about joe blow. Another instance of 1984 coming around to haunt us.

Watch cable 10 tonight (Wednesday)

I have been allowed to participate on the cable election coverage, I know it's a surprise to me after my success last year covering the municipal election, but I'll be my usual irascible self. The show will start at 9pm cable 10

And people will still think the government is not out to get you

All defenders of liberty should read thisThe UK government trumpets free speech while trampling on it

The debate continues ad nauseum

As noted in the previous post a resolution to reject the frink tenders is on the agenda for the next Cobourg Council meeting. There is also a formality, for Council, a letter from Malcolm Wardman is placed on the agenda and then consigned to the bureaucratic garbage bin - it is accepted as information (in other words Councillors may read it if they want to and then are allowed to forget it ever existed). The letter is not attached to the agenda but we have obtained a copy and it is here as well some of the remarks of the correspondent (not Malcolm Wardman) are noted below; the best part of the present argument is bolded - a very good question and something that the four dead white men should be held accountable for, I think it works out to $625,000 taxpayers dollars they have personally wasted.

"Hello Ben:
Thanks for staying on top of the frink story.Your readers may be interested in the attached early version of a letter signed by Malcolm Wardman. Apparently the Town has agreed to read the final version of his letter out loud at Tuesday’s council meeting. Hopefully it will be published in Tuesday’s Cobourg Daily Star. I believe that it also has been submitted to Northumberland News.

It points out that the lowest frink bid of $1.65M is only part of the story. There’s a potential extra $350,000 to be paid by the taxpayers, bringing the total to as much as $2M. This includes about $150,000 to Totten Sims Hubicki and an estimated $200,000 for overruns and items either left out of the tender or mentioned in the tender but not bid on.

Your readers may not be aware that the entire cost of developing the park to date is about $2.5M. This includes acquiring the property; completing the remediation of it; building the harbour wall, parking lots and related walkways; opening up and landscaping around the old creek; and building the oval paver walkways and installing the drainage system for the natural rink.

If the frink project somehow goes ahead, however, the total cost of the park will approach $5M.

This means that we would be almost doubling the cost of the park simply to install a miniscule patch of ice. How can this possibly be justified?"

The correspondent goes on to say that they decided to have Malcolm represent them as he has the same qualifications - a P. Eng., as the Town's Director of Engineering. That does knock down the argument that the objectors don't have the expertise to challenge the Town!
As titled the debate continues.

Another story
Chris Pelletier has set up a web site here a slice of life in Northumberland County and having more time on his hands than us has kept on top of local issues with wire stories, one of his links is about the advance polls here
Now is that a good figure or a bad one?