|
City Hall - Presentation to City Council For the third time I was unable to make a presentation at a public City Council meeting. This very unhealthy circumstance has arisen because of the Mayor’s obvious intent to thwart the wishes of the citizens who have been asking, not for a provincial audit of the WUC but a much more significant audit to be done by the Provincial Auditor General. His stated reason is speed. I don’t agree that speed is of the essence. So far he has succeeded in preventing concerned citizens from exercising their democratic right to be heard certainly, on the question of the obscene rate increases imposed by the WUC. He has also denied citizens the right to decide who should carry out the audit and most importantly, the terms of reference that should be followed. Such vehement opposition to the citizen’s legal and historical right to free speech is cause for great concern. Below is my undelivered presentation. Presentation to City Council- Monday 27th August 2007 Good evening Mayor Francis & Members
of Council, Two Polls, one on local radio and the other in the local newspaper show that support for that audit, 97% & 85% respectively is too large to be denied. How have we arrived at this state of affairs? Mayor Francis, at the last two public council meetings you have used questionable procedural bylaws to muzzle public comment on the unconscionable increases in water rates and sewer replacement charges. Do I have to remind members of council that as elected representatives of the citizens you are paid a very respectable stipend to run the affairs of this city. Actually, the Windsor Star has revealed that it is more than respectable but downright handsome. All the more necessity for you to govern with prudence and transparency. Mayor Francis your public assertions that diversion of funds took place followed with a consequent denial causes a problem for all of us. The melding of the administration of the WUC with the Enwin commercial group of companies is a real cause for concern. The method of making senior appointments and the constant stream of executive replacements in both bodies leads to a question of quality of management. The removal of board members of the WUC who were experienced, well qualified and elected seems to fly in the face of prudence. Stacking the two boards with councillors rather than a solid majority of taxpayers is also very worrying. It appears that certainly up to 2002, the board of the WUC was functioning very well and their plans for watermain replacement was not found to be wanting by those responsible for the Watson report. Mayor Francis, the genesis of the present problems date back before
you were elected to your present office. However, you have been in
control for the best part of four years. Under your watch the WUC
has become a problem culminating in the new very excessive increases
to the water rates that are the subject of questioning as to their
timing and severity. The ferocity of your opposition to public participation
in the WUC debate is undemocratic and unworthy. All members of council are receiving remuneration directly or indirectly from both the Enwin Group and the WUC, an obvious conflict, making it essential for the citizens to play a significant role in forming the terms of reference for that audit. It must be obvious to you that this council has lost the trust of the Citizens of Windsor and the cause has been an overriding secrecy and a cavalier attitude to citizens’ legitimate questions. If you find your duties too onerous then resign and make way for the many willing to replace you. This presentation was not made to council as Mayor Francis used a procedural bylaw to exclude any delegations of concerned citizens from speaking on the subject of the huge increases in Water and Sewer Charges August 13, 2007 PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL Good Evening Mayor Francis and Members of council I find it very hard to express my feelings engendered by the arbitrary and obscene increase in water and sewer charges that you have just announced. What I will say is that you should all be ashamed of yourselves. I have been trying to think of a way to bring it home to the citizens of Windsor how this council and its administration is abusing them by treating them as mindless masses. How could you make a $70 million arena a priority over water? Water is a basic element of life and we die without it. We have been paying specific taxes to make sure that we in this enlightened city of the western world have clean water and efficient sewers able to handle waste and storm surges. Year after year, citizens have paid and paid and paid for water and sewers. Not only have they paid but have willingly accepted increases and surcharges only to find that they have been robbed. Mayor Francis, your entirely staged performance at the whiteboard was far from convincing. We are not school children who have to sit quietly as teacher does the sums for us and then refuses to take questions from those who can add, subtract, divide and multiply. The fact is, you have lost the trust of the citizens. You have waffled on the subject of diverted revenues that were not applied for a specifically stated use. You have also told us that you found unsatisfactory management when you became Mayor. Why has it taken nearly four years for you to act? I believe that those who you so easily condemn should be allowed to tell their story publicly. Councillor Lewenza, with your background I find it tasteless verbiage to say that the additional charges are only a dollar a day extra. Many citizens have called me and they have done the math and arrived at a total of $365.00 a year on top of the present charges. They do not feel that the increase is justified and in some cases its the straw to break the camel’s back. You also tell us that arrangements can be made for those finding the burden too heavy. Who are you to be the arbiter of who gets relief and who does not? How will you explain to the struggling businesses in this city how they will feature in your relief endeavours? Any local firm
is not the answer to the request for an independent forensic audit.
We understand that the debits equal the credits. What we need is
to know who put us in this hole. Citizens want to know the truth
and any incompetence or malfeasance should be disciplined. This
should apply to the Board, as well as Management and Staff of The
WUC. What you are being asked to do is; Immediately request The Provincial Auditor General to undertake a Forensic audit of the Finances and Business Practices of the Windsor Utilities Commission. Nothing less is acceptable to those citizens who now are lining up to sign a petition making the same request. July 30, 2007 Good Evening Mayor Francis and City Councillors, As the subject of Report No. 12937 is to finalise the logistics of budget deliberations I thought that some words from a taxpayer would be a useful addition to your discussions I believe that taxpayers are entitled to honest, transparent budget figures and descriptions. To date that has not been the case. It has become very clear that the resultant additional revenue raised by the imposition of extra Levies (Taxes) have not been clearly explained to the public. The calculations employed by the administration have resulted in far greater revenue than the public were led to believe. This obfuscation appears to be deliberate and should not occur in the future. This brings me to the latest revelations at the WUC. We taxpayers rely on the councillors and appointed members who sit on the boards and commissions to safeguard our interests. They are not there to benefit from a grace and favour appointment. They are as responsible as the management for the overall efficiency of the body with which they are connected. What is needed now is your clear understanding that
Operational Expenses are to be reported separately from Capital
Costs and funds
must not be used to prop up non-performing entities such as Enwin.
It must be clear to taxpayers how their tax dollars are being allocated.
Taxpayers clearly do not understand the Finance Department’s
method of calculating required revenue. Any report that is circulated
for the public’s perusal and comment must be clear and couched
in plain English. I suggest that the word “LEVY” be banished
from council’s lexicon and replaced with the correct noun “TAX”.
Further, it would help if the word “City” would be replaced
by the word “Citizens of Windsor” The next and very important
step would be, that during any budget discussion to always display
a large sign with the words “ PRIORITY! PRIORITY! PRIORITY! Al Nelman June 11, 2007 Good Evening Mayor Francis & Members of Council. Report #: 12842 ST/9726 is presented as a business
case study supporting the administration’s recommendation
to purchase the right to operate the Detroit portion of the Windsor/
Detroit tunnel. The third glaring omission is the absence of an engineering report on the physical state of the tunnel and the costs involved in maintaining this ageing property. The report states that the asset will be SOLD and TRANSFERRED to a newly formed commercial corporation. This again, replicates the Enwin deal that has cost citizens dearly, who have literally bought their own asset. I describe it as double taxation. Citizens will once again be subjected to an unelected board of directors who are appointed by the Mayor’s office and senior administration officials without public scrutiny. The deliberate secrecy that has governed Enwin’s activities will apply once again if this proposal is adopted. No compelling logical case has been presented for the citizens of Windsor to pay for the doubtful privilege of assuming Detroit’s tunnel operations while at the same time being asked to give up direct control of the new operation. Even more outrageous is that this council has discussed and secretly accepted this scheme in another “In Camera” meeting. With the tunnel’s revenue declining, its long
term viability uncertain, a constant threat of terrorist activity
coupled with our
own budget problems, the question must be asked, why are we even
discussing what is proposed? It makes no sense to this taxpayer. Al Nelman, June 11, 2007 ADDENDUM Wouldn’t it be better for the citizens of Windsor to sell their interest in the tunnel to the City of Detroit for $75,000,000. We could renew quite a large portion of our decaying infrastructure with that kind of financing May 2, 2007 Good afternoon Mayor Francis & members of council. I cannot make this presentation without commenting on the time that this is taking place. I believe that a meeting on the 2007 budget has to be the most important of the year. I really object to this impossible timing which leads me to ask this question. Do you think that meetings of this importance are for you to hear from the electorate or is it called with two unrelated purposes? The first that comes to mind is that a meeting at 2.0 pm on a working day is to ensure that anyone who is working will be prevented from being here. The second is that public meetings are to be called at a time that is convenient for this body and the administration rather than the citizens whose money you are spending. I can only say that I think this is farcical and as elected representatives you should be ashamed. As for the budget itself I have to ask you if at any time in your deliberations it crossed your minds to set a budget without any increase. In any case, I won’t discuss any single item as I’m convinced that whatever you hear today will not cause the published document to be significantly altered. I hope to come before you at a later date to discuss the magic trick that turned a so called “Debt Reduction Fund” into a “Debt Avoidance Fund” and then into a “Capital Slush Fund” This leads me to ask you all to tell the citizens of this city why you do not have a comprehensive easily understood budget document with previous year comparisons distributed way earlier than this so that it can be thoroughly examined and public input incorporated. October 4, 2006 Mayor Francis, Members of Council, Good Evening, In view of the release of the Price Waterhouse report, all further discussion this evening is moot. I suggest that the arena discussion be deferred till the new council is in place. The fact is that the proposal before you, if passed, will commit the new council to an unaffordable $60 Million project using a new neighborhood centre as an excuse to build an arena. The reason put forward is, that taxpayers somehow have an obligation to house the Spitfires as if they will bring us untold benefits. The truth is that they are, in fact, just another special interest group. Ask spitfire owners to open their cheque books not the wallets of hard pressed taxpayers. As a retiree living on a modest fixed income I object to the notion that I will be forced to financially support this outrageous undertaking and absorb the inevitable tax increases. Mayor Francis, with the greatest of respect, I listen to you telling us that it is your vision to see a new arena and a home for the spitfires. Frankly, I and many others don’t share your vision. What about our vision? Rebuilt roads, sewers, leaner administration, less overpriced city services and a reduction in the pollution caused by international trucks on our streets. We might even look forward to a moratorium on tax increases. With the election so near, how can councilors Zuk and Wilson in good conscience vote on committing a new council to this mega-buck folly. They will not be around to answer for the results. There are already two new arenas to be built in LaSalle and Tecumseh. Are we to add to the mix just because you feel hard done by? The problem of this and previous city councils is that they have been opposed to private enterprise. Decisions to enter into the field of commercial development have resulted in massive losses of tax dollars. The western super anchor site, the Candarel fiasco, the overpriced Taj Mahal on city hall square and the glorified washroom aka the new bus station downtown, have been nothing less than taxpayer abuse. Do not compound these errors. I suggest that you meet with the Mayor of Tecumseh to explore ways of working together seeking an agreement that might ensure that the proposed new raceway and sports complex becomes the regional centre you have been so strongly advocating. In closing, I can assure all members of this council in support of this multi million dollar travesty, you will have a very hard time on the street defending your position. Remember, it’s not your money. It’s ours. It is not to be wasted on your vision but spent wisely on ours. I repeat, defer this discussion. Thank you for your time. August 8, 2006 Mayor Francis, Members of Council, Good Evening It is my opinion that the $65,000 WPL Operational Review has not succeeded in its real but unstated mandate to find substantial items of concern. Time permits one comment on its contents. The recommendation for the Board to produce a new strategic plan by the fall of this year is ridiculous. It fails to emphasize that a year ago council insisted the Board cancel a special meeting to deal with a strategic plan for the WPL. It also fails to draw attention to council’s ban on the appointment of a permanent CEO and other vacant senior management positions. The administration’s report on the Operational Review was completed without any consultation with the WPL Board and its contents can lead the public to believe that the WPL Board has not measured up to the task of successfully carrying out its mandate. Just more innuendo. Paragraph 1 Recommendations (3) calls for a new process of selecting and recruiting volunteers for agencies and boards. Why? This has nothing to do with a review of WPL operations. Nothing! Inadvertently or deliberately, it suggests that somehow the members of the WPL Board were appointed inappropriately and were consequently a poor choice. Paragraph 1 Recommendations (4) makes no sense by suggesting that further time should be wasted seeking synergies between the WPL and the City. The public should be made aware that a joint review committee spent a year seeking those elusive synergies without success. Areas of fruitful cooperation are already in operation. The Library is a highly specialized institution and is granted autonomy by the Ontario Public Libraries Act. The members of the WPL Board are bound by certain legal obligations and the city should stop wasting everyone’s time trying to ignore those obligations. Paragraph 2 Background Refers to 2003 when the restructuring of the city administration came apart at the seams. Unfortunately, transfer of senior WPL management back and forth led to a poisoned atmosphere inherited by a new WPL board, not appointed till June 2004. Most of the recommendations in both the report and review are clearly unnecessary as the WPL Board has been regularly dealing with them as a matter of due diligence. The only areas that have resulted in the board’s inability to move forward are those directly restricted by the city. The WPL has annual independent financial audits and for the years 2004 and 2005, no serious discrepancies were uncovered. Yes, there were recommendations to improve some accounting procedures and a more stringent reporting protocol for the Board but citizens of Windsor can be assured that their WPL dollars are well spent. Seriously under funded, the WPL consumes the smallest portion of the city’s budget. There has been a constant drumbeat emanating from some members of council implying that there are serious problems with the Board and Management of the WPL. Nothing can be further from the truth. The secretive and exploitive attempt to justify turning the Library into just another city department has resulted in the extremely expensive and ineffective exercise here under discussion. It is my view that placing the Library in the hands of this city’s administration would be a disaster. Board membership has been extremely frustrating, and has had a negative impact on my reputation. The KPMG report does nothing to rectify a widely held public conception that I and the other members of the board have been less than effective. Tonight I expect to hear a total vindication of the Board’s performance WPL management and staff at all levels are to be congratulated for their dedication and resilience. Their performance has been nothing less than spectacular. They have made the WPL one of the best in Canada. Thank you for your time July 25, 2005 Mayor Francis, Members of Council, Good Evening Before I continue with my prepared submission, I wish to make it crystal clear that I am not affiliated with any other individual, group or groups. I’m here as usual to represent myself as a concerned taxpayer. Any rumours to the contrary are without foundation. We have before us, a recommendation to endorse the Essex-Windsor Regional Transportation Master Plan. In what appears to me as an attempt to stifle criticism it has been introduced in a deliberately late and low-key fashion. The very first paragraph is in itself an outrageous call for a complete elimination of council’s legal accountability. It calls for the taxpayers to issue a blank cheque to this council using the border traffic problem as an excuse. I’m not a traffic engineer neither am I a fisherman but I do see a red herring when it’s put on my plate. I have read the report and found it to be totally overwhelming in its coverage but the costs associated with its many constituents are notably absent. Some sections that deal with local items are easy to support. However, those are completely swamped by the inclusion of the international border traffic problems. I cannot detect any delineation between the two issues. The administration should never have produced such an all encompassing document and a recommendation that it be accepted in its present form. I can come to no other conclusion that its introduction this evening is a blatant attempt to mislead the public. This master plan should be split into more narrowly defined sections and made the subject of public scrutiny. It appears to me that it is really a desire to adopt an in your face posture to senior governments who are no doubt shortchanging this city. The request for a blank cheque will give council the freedom to travel your own horseshoe road regardless of cost and consequence. It is well to note that at this time, the short-term problem of truck lines throughout the city has been largely eliminated. Cross border traffic is an international question and this body alone cannot answer it. I wish it wasn’t so, but we have to face the fact that without massive Federal & Provincial participation there cannot be a satisfactory conclusion to the cross border problem. You cannot go it alone and you most certainly cannot ask the taxpayers for carte blanche to commit millions of tax dollars without explanation or public input. Do not forget that this council is an elected forum and its electoral responsibilities to the citizens of this city must not be abrogated in a dangerous fight with senior levels of government. I respectfully request that this resolution be tabled and brought before the public in a new format with the addition of realistic costing for each section. I cannot help admonishing all council members that to vote for this recommendation as written would, in my opinion, be an intolerable error. Members of Council, like me, when you read this document, it must have surely aroused grave misgivings with its blanket coverage and the inclusion of the totally unacceptable first paragraph. I urge you to table it. You do not have the right to bypass accepted municipal governance by asking the already debt laden taxpayers for a blank cheque for this or any other programme. I respectfully ask you not to follow this recommendation, and show the taxpayers that you are truly representing their interests. After all, that’s why you’re sitting here tonight. Thank You. June 21, 2005 Mayor Francis, Councillors, Good Evening I derive little pleasure from making this type of presentation. However, I believe that you should severely limit your response to the many delegations that are here requesting financial support for their various activities. The special interest delegations here this evening believe that they deserve extra-ordinary treatment in the shape of tax dollars. They believe this, because successive councils have reneged on a mandated duty to use tax dollars to deliver essential services to taxpayers as a whole. The result has been a diversion of substantial funds to prop up entities unable to pay their way. Consequently, taxpayers have been forced to assume an unnecessary debt they didn’t agree to and cannot afford. Clearly, the special interest group most deserving of your attention is the consolidated taxpayer base. This year, it is necessary to amplify the important constraints that should control your budget deliberations. They are indeed, a daunting list, the most important being: (1) A debt of close to $200 million. (2) Exposure to MFP for $242+ million. (3) The continuing Candarel scandal, costing close to $2 million annually for empty space (4) Probably the most important of all is the recent imposition of a significant tax increase. In addition, there is a constantly crumbling infrastructure coupled with the substantial debt level of the Windsor Utilities Group that compound the taxpayers’ present burden. These are the main barriers that should be foremost in your mind as you listen to the requests here today. Simply put, we cannot afford precious tax dollars to prop up failing enterprises that the majority of taxpayers do not support. I encourage you to eliminate subsidies by insisting on a “User Pay” regime that recovers the full cost of the service provided and most importantly, dispose of all city commercial activity. Your priority must be the many taxpayers living pay cheque to pay cheque and the considerable number of those with modest fixed incomes who are hanging on to their homes by a whisker. Continuing tax increases are not the way to go and the hospital tax cancelled. Touchy feely attitudes should be discarded as I urge you to stay the course of prudence and concentrate on the efficient and economical provision of essential services only. Your actions following this meeting will indicate whether you can put political squabbling aside for the good of us all. Now, I think it’s the right time to remind you that it’s not your money it’s ours. As a closing thought, I find it incomprehensible that in the present debt laden circumstances, this council is prepared to divert $15 MILLION or more for an arena that will serve a very small percentage of the citizens of this city. Thank you. November 22, 2004 First, let me make it quite clear that despite being a member of the WPL board I have not discussed the matter under scrutiny here, with any other member of that board. My remarks are made purely in my capacity as a concerned taxpayer. Time is of the essence, so I will direct my remarks to the Carver Protocol and the report on public library models in Ontario. My thanks go to the author of the report both for the helpful research and its lucidity. It is no secret that I have been quite vocal in my opposition to the governance employed at the library. The WPL board operates under the Carver “Policy Governance” model which is a registered commercial product that has to be purchased from its author and requires substantial costs to maintain. My main criticism of Carver is that under its present interpretation it virtually prevents the board from fulfilling its basic obligations to the taxpayers. The introductory pamphlet entitled, “Some Principles of Policy Governance” contains a great deal of jargon and a list of do’s and don’ts governing board behaviour. From that list I have chosen what I believe to be the two most egregious items: (1) Board Members do not approve budgets or other management documents, including operating or strategic plans. (2) Board members do not get involved in day-to-day operational issues. Resulting from these restrictions, we have the ludicrous situation that finds the Acting Library CEO presenting a $9 million budget document to this council’s budget committee. No prior discussion with the WPL board members who are entirely ignorant of its content and underlying philosophy. Further, members of the WPL board were not even afforded the common courtesy of being given a copy prior to its presentation. While the city is looking for a solution to resolve severe financial problems, the use of the Carver Protocol in the WPL places the search for library economies in the hands of one non-appointed individual, which completely negates one of the basic reasons for the board’s existence. Carver in my opinion is a costly impediment to good management. Taxpayers should be extremely concerned when a city service can appropriate $9 million without even a preliminary oversight by their appointed representatives. This situation begs the question, why have a board at all? I believe that the answer is contained in the report under discussion this evening that indicates a general trend to the rationalization of city services. It’s really a no-brainer when it is so obvious that substantial cost reductions can be made. Equally, the upheaval associated with the recent precipitous resignation of the WPL’s CEO would be avoided. An additional benefit would be that a qualified librarian could manage the day-to-day library operations. There appears to be no compelling reason for this council not to emulate other enlightened public bodies as outlined in the report. My own choice as a taxpayer is for the WPL to be fully integrated into the Community Services department of this municipality. I particularly favour the Peterborough model. Council should take this opportunity to make the fundamental change that will certainly result in streamlined management coupled with significant tax dollar savings. It would also eliminate the subtle and destructive “Turf war” that is exemplified in the tone and content of the WPL letter attached to the report. Much is at stake and taxpayers must be assured that their appointed representatives are in a position to closely monitor the direction of their hard earned tax dollars. February 18, 2004 Budget Deliberations It gives me great
pleasure to be here this evening lending credence to the proposition
that
we are now into a “People Based Budget” programme. Taxpayers of all stripes cannot keep on paying more and more for basic services that are either neglected or simply not delivered. Services mainly ignored, while millions of tax dollars have been squandered in risky commercial projects that have played a major role in the financial crisis now facing this city. Value for money seems to be the last consideration. Just put yourselves in the shoes of the most vulnerable, who face the prospect of either losing a cherished home or life savings that have been invested in a small business. The deplorable state of this city’s infrastructure is a constant reminder that the old ways have led to failure and I remind you that you were elected to remedy this untenable situation. I urge you to resist the relentless pressure from special interest groups. Examples such as The Buskers, The International Freedom Festival and The Art Gallery come readily to mind. Certain members of this council have recently made it known that they are in favour of continuing to subsidise the AGW. Funding the AGW will fly in the face of your election promises. The product being offered has been totally rejected by the citizens of this city. It is a typical exercise in elitism that should not receive one precious tax dollar. Bearing in mind their multi- million trust fund, they should be left to sink or swim on their own efforts. You should also consider divesting the city of all commercial interests. Taking risks with tax dollars is absolutely unacceptable. Mayor Francis has quite correctly told you that you are facing some “tough choices”. It is your responsibility to make them. I’m sure that you do not need reminding that the cash register is empty and our debt is obscene and likely to grow. Want is out and Need is in. If you stay focused on the basics outlined earlier, the choices are not really so difficult. Fitting watchwords for this council are: FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY In dealing with the budget, it will serve you well to remember: Tax Dollars are Not Your Money!!!!! I trust that these deliberations will succeed in restoring the long ignored rights of the taxpayers. A copy of this presentation can be found on my web site: www.freewindsor.com January 5, 2004 Good Evening Mayor Francis and members of council. I wish you all a happy healthy & successful 2004. This presentation deals with a request to commit $2.5 million to literally rebuild Roseland and upscale Little River municipal golf courses. It is very clear that special interest groups are unaware that the gravy train has left the station. The members of the board who voted for this must be suffering from a severe case of golf club envy. Let me disillusion them. These are not Windsor’s Golf and Country Clubs but unnecessary taxpayer owned assets. Roseland. How many of Windsor’s population are able to or actually use the facility? Precious few! How many elderly homeowners are clinging desperately to their homes while their tax and utilities continue to rise? This, while a privileged few are strutting their stuff, obviously believing that their pleasure should be underwritten by the taxpayers of this city. The same Roseland board persuaded a previous council to construct a multi million dollar pro-shop. Who paid for this unwarranted competition to the tax paying businesses already serving the golfing needs of the general public? Who are still paying that bill? Taxpayers, that’s who! It’s outrageous! Does a municipal course require a full time club professional? Certainly not! To follow this logic, every community center with an ice rink should employ a full time professional skating instructor. Mayor Francis and members of council, let’s be realistic. We are in a real financial crisis and you will need to find some unusual solutions to relieve the situation. I suggest that certain taxpayer assets should be put up for sale. Start with municipally owned golf courses, the marina and Peche Island. I realize that the mere suggestion to sell some sacred cows, cherished by the few and paid for by the many, will bring howls of indignation. Sacred cows defensively described by their users as being gems in Windsor’s crown of social benefits. The truth is, that a privileged few are exploiting the many for purely selfish reasons. Millions of tax dollars are used to capitalize these institutions. However, unlike private investment, there is a glaring absence of an adequate return on those investment dollars. The Roseland board displays complete indifference to the city’s larger problems. Is there a need for a massive rebuild of the golf course? Certainly not! Roseland is not a privately owned country club. It is just a municipal golf course. If Roseland were to be sold to a private entity, the result would be a twofold benefit. A substantial amount of cash would become available for investment to cushion a portion of long- term debt. The new owners would pay property and business taxes giving us some desperately needed, new and unencumbered income. Any fear of the course being closed or used for development can be prevented by zoning and a watertight contract of sale. The request is a habit carryover from previous councils who wouldn’t recognize their true mandate or set priorities. At the same time they were willing to risk millions of tax dollars in risky commercial schemes. You all campaigned on a desire to represent us in a new and progressive way. This is a golden opportunity to begin delivering on your election promises. The request presented here this evening is unwarranted, is without merit and must be rejected. Thank you for your time.
|
