16 Mar 2007

Fiscally Responsible? I don't think so.

So, apparently our Council did not direct Municipal CAO Franklin Wu to seek public opinion on whether to support a $2-million request from the Bowmanville Hospital Foundation, but it was done nonetheless, whether by council direction or not. The money would be used as part of a much needed $10-million proposed renovation. (See Metroland editorial: Survey may not hold the answer, March 16). At a cost of $4000, there was a phone poll of 400 residents of Clarington. That works out to $10 per person questioned. Pretty expensive poll, especially when it is ignored by Council.

The formal request for money was made weeks ago by Dr. Benjamin Fuller, Medical Director, Lakeridge Health Corporation and Department Chief of Emergency Medicine at Memorial Hospital on February 26. Now Council says there was not enough time for a public meeting, they could have held one on March 5, couldn't they? Or simply asked for those interested to email the clerk's department, write in, or phone in their opinion - yes or no. Or they could have also had a web poll on the municipal website, advertised in the local newspapers. Would that have cost an extra $4000.00? And now that Council has decided to delay their decision another two weeks, they still are not providing a public meeting on the issue. They seem to have some irrational fear of public meetings!

Why is it so important for them to have input from the public on this issue when they refuse to listen to the public on the governance issue of election of the regional chair? When they refuse even to entertain a public meeting on the issue? Is it because this is a direct money issue, and since our taxes are going up so much this year, they want to be able to say they asked the public on this one issue? Believe it or not, election of regional chair is also a money issue, but that's another matter. What hat are they wearing when they decide not to listen to the public? That of a democratic, responsible council? Or a dunce cap? You decide. Or are we the dunces for trusting and electing them?

It really doesn't matter, however, since they didn't listen to the people once again - the poll resulted in 74% being in favour of funding for the hospital. That's a pretty wide margin, yet our indecisive, vacillating, less than stellar council has decided they still can't make a decision. The numerous delegations were also extremely supportive of this initiative. It is obvious they (Council) do not want to give funding for our local hospital, and were hoping the poll would support their preference. It did not, so they need another two weeks to try to come up with a good enough reason not to do so (one that might be accepted by the public who use that hospital).

This new council is making increasingly questionable decisions. And they are loathe to give substantial reasons for the unaccountable, feckless direction they are taking. Pretending to listen to residents on some issues, and totally ignoring them on other issues. They are arbitrary, erratic, capricious and undemocratic. And getting progressively worse. This is an alarming progression since they have only just begun - only 4 months into a 4 year term. How much damage will this bunch inflict on Clarington over the next 4 years?

Democratic Deficit? I would say yes. An apt description of what is happening in our municipality.

10 comments:

  1. I am so disgusted by this idiotic council. Don't they even realize how stupid they look when they make a big deal about listening to public input and then don't listen to public input? Trying to cut the big budget by spending $10 per phone call on a poll then they then ignore? Denying those who ask for a public meeting their right to be heard?

    These are the kinds of things that are NOT forgotten in 4 years. The anger only builds, as it did with our previous mayor.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't agree that we as taxpayers for the Municipality should be funding a provincial responsibility. Many areas of the municipal budget were cut due to the large tax increase caused by the previous council deferring payments until this year. Lets get our municipal affairs in order until we start paying for the provincial responsibilities that currently are underfunded. Get Mr. O'Toole to lobby to get the necessary funding for the hospital.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm willing to pay the nominal amount per year for the upgrades that Bowmanville Hospital needs. We all use it at some point in our lives. It may be a provincial responsibility but we're not getting the help from the province that we should. They have other places to spend their (our) money rather than hospital upgrages for us. We need to take care of our own community and not depend on them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. They're trying to look fiscally responsible, but we still have 3 from the previous council and one from a previous era, and not one of those give a hoot about public input. They all think they know better. Now they've convinced our new Mayor too. Bravo to Mr. Woo and Mr. Hooper for bucking the trend.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm willing to pay $16 more per year ($1.44 per month or so) for the next 4 years to have the improvements made to Bowmanville Hospital. Most people are. Council doesn't want to add it to the tax bill because then it will bring it up into double digits - over 10% and that's a psychological hurdle none of them wants to cross. We're already way higher than the other Durham Region communities. This little bit more won't make much difference to tax payers. We're already beyond reasonable. Why not spend this money on a good cause, instead of some of the fluff our money is presently going to support, such as "Total Hockey"?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Too bad that those of you who can't be bothered to pay an extra $16 per year for the upgrades to our hospital. If you want to wait for McGuinty/Sorbara to do it, you'll have a very long wait. O'Toole can lobby all he wants, but in opposition they won't even bother to listen.

    The new council isn't any better than the old one. Sell Total Hockey. That would be a good start. Another white elephant bad decision when a council didn't care what the public wanted or didn't want. They knew better.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ick. Time for these people to get over their superior know-it-all complex where they don't listen to what the public has to say be it on the regional chair thing or the hospital funding thing. All I can say is get over yourselves and start listening. You were elected to do what is best for the community, not play politics and follow your own agendas, whatever those may be.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't want more taxes. But I do want a hospital with a bigger better emergency department and with all the things the fundraising campaign can do. It is worth the extra $16 a year or so on my tax bill.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If this council was so worried about finding ways to redice the high property tax rate, they could have started with getting rid of that ridiculous mileage increase, and gone back to keeping track of their mileage so that they are paid for what they use, not a flat rate that is far too high.

    They didn't try very hard, did they?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well Watchdog, you called it as did a lot of other people. They found a way to vote down the hospital donation in spite of the large base of support for the project from the public. They twisted the poll results so that they could rationalize their rejection of it.

    A big disappointment for most of the municipality. Anyone who can afford to own a property, or multiple properties, can afford approx. $16 per year on their tax bill. Cut out a cup of coffee a day for a week or two. What a sacrifice! Those who can't afford a home pay no property taxes.

    This decision is disgraceful.

    ReplyDelete