NANAIMO CITY HALL BLOG

Author Archive

Email to Mayor: Who’ll Step Up, Take Responsibility?

In CITY GOVERNMENT, EMAILS TO MAYOR / COUNCILLORS, LETTERS TO THE LOCAL PRESS on October 12, 2010 at 7:41 pm

Frank Murphy — October 12, 2010
Re:   Long road ahead to recover money
From:    <frankmurphy@shaw.ca>
To:    <Mayor&Council@nanaimo.ca>
CC:    <GeneralManagers@nanaimo.ca>

Mayor Ruttan,

I was concerned about a comment attributed to you in today’s Nanaimo News Bulletin (Long road ahead to recover hotel money, Nanaimo mayor says) and before I sent my response to the paper I wanted to ask you about it. It occurred to me that there is a very good chance that the comment is reported in error. This is the comment:

“Ruttan, who was elected in 2008, said he wouldn’t be surprised if the case eventually goes to an arbitrated settlement, adding that any money returned will be good for Nanaimo taxpayers.”

It is very difficult for me to believe that with a BC Supreme Court judgment in the City’s favour in hand, you would let the lawyers for the firms in default believe that you are already offering to have the matter settled by arbitration.

I sincerely hope you will be demanding a retraction from the paper as I can’t imagine that you said such a thing.

The article attributes to you also the comment that “many of these companies are shell companies with few assets.” Am I to believe that you do not in fact know if these contracts have or have ever had any enforceability?

Who will step up and take some responsibility here?  This comment was attributed to then Deputy City Manager Al Kenning in the Bulletin on November 12, 2008. Based on this assurance Nanaimo citizens voted for a new Mayor and Council days later.

“All costs and fees paid by the city for the project would also be returned to the city if it were found the contract was in default,” said Kenning. “

I would not for a second begrudge the Read the rest of this entry »

Can the Weak-Mayor*, No-Party System Control City Spending?

In CITY GOVERNMENT on October 6, 2010 at 11:14 am

Frank Murphy — October 6, 2010
Globe and Mail columnist Jeffrey Simpson explored some of the issues facing municipalities in Canada in his weekend column: Dear Toronto: A Warning From Your Ottawa Cousins. Most of his points are echoes of Alan Broadbent’s book Urban Nation: Why We Need to Give Power Back to the Cities to Make Canada Strong, which I talked about in my Sept. 16 post.  I’m surprised that in neither, is there a discussion of the lack of costs control in cities. The assumption seems to be that the great corrective element is the ballot box. I’d like to see the development of an office (independent of individual municipalities and probably under provincial authority) of combined responsibilities of audit, ombudsman, cost/benefit analyses, strategic planning overview and the resources needed to deliver these to City Councils and Senior Management.

Speaking of Alan Broadbent and his book Urban Nation he’ll be conducting a free webinar Thursday, October 28, 2010 from 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM (ET). It will start with a presentation followed by a discussion: How can cities be enabled to play a greater role in the country’s prosperity? Read the rest of this entry »

Size Doesn’t Matter But Style Does

In PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT on September 23, 2010 at 12:30 pm

Blog reader J.Olson contributed this comment to Dan Appell’s post Draft: Newcastle + Brechin Neighbourhood Plan. Posted here for further discussion.

Size doesn’t matter but style does. The comparison between the two projects as offered is irrelevant. Both projects are mall redevelopments, both are mixed use projects, both have vehicle access through the development site. The planning frameworks for these projects are however quite different and this is where style does matter.

There are several points to be made in the case of Oakridge Mall;

• All major projects in Vancouver are required to provide 20% non-market housing and to provide park space at a rate of 2.75 acres per 1000 population. These obligations are non-negotiable.

• The Oakridge Policy Statement does not confer development rights or height allowances, these rights will be the subject of a future project based public re-zoning process, followed by a Development Permit process.

• The City will require a road dedication as a condition of re-zoning and this also is not negotiable.

• The Oakridge Policy Statement is the result of a very public process. It is a design process characterized by negotiations between the Read the rest of this entry »

Tax Revolt! California’s Proposition 13

In CITY FINANCE, CITY GOVERNMENT on September 23, 2010 at 12:20 pm

Frank Murphy — September 23, 2010
I wanted to follow up on a point Ron made in a comment on the post How Much Freight Can Average Taxpayer Pay. He issued the challenge: “Perhaps we could begin with some suggestions about specifically which budget items might be cut.”

It occurred to me that the greater challenge might be to identify where best to spend, what areas are underfunded — hidden false economies like neglected maintenance that will bite us down the road.

Those interested in municipal taxation issues will want to look at California’s experience after its tax-revolt Proposition 13 that rolled back property taxes, capped them at 1 percent of purchase price, and limited yearly increases to 2 percent. Basing municipal taxation on property market value assessments has all kinds of problems but a lot of people think that Proposition 13 resulted in the disaster that is current California with entire counties Read the rest of this entry »

How Much Freight Can Average Taxpayer Pay?

In CITY FINANCE on September 21, 2010 at 12:49 pm

Jim Taylor — September 21, 2010
I posted the following on my blog www.nanaimo-info-blog.com today which came out of yesterdays council meeting.

How Much Freight Can Average Taxpayer Pay?

One of the things discussed at yesterdays city council meeting was regards the problems some municipalities are facing as a result of industry either closing or in some cases refusing to pay their full tax bill.

An example given were our friends in Port Alberni where the residential taxes went up 25% to cover the loss of taxes no longer coming from industry.

The problem would not be as acute in Nanaimo as approximately 4% of total taxes are paid by industry. There is the desire provincially to reduce the ratio of taxes paid by industry when compared with residential taxes. In this case Nanaimo is ahead of some other municipalities as we had already started to reduce the amount of taxes industry is paying.

The net result regardless of how you want to slice it, is there will be a continuing increasing burden of taxes being shifed to the residential taxpayers in our cities as industry pushes for lower taxes, or simply close shop and move elsewhere.

In Nanaimo there is a relatively small industrial tax base, however a large percentage of city taxes are paid by the commercial or business sector. This fact was pointed out at yesterday’s city council meeting.

The point which was not made, was the fact that commercial taxpayers don’t actually pay the taxes, rather they collect their taxes from their customers, which of course is once again the average taxpayer.

So you could argue that there is really only ONE taxpayer in the province. Perhaps they will come to the same place as industry has, in that they will simply pay what taxes they think is fair, and take the city to court to lower the bill.

Home

eMail Exchange with Planner Tucker re: Sept 14 eMail

In PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT on September 17, 2010 at 12:50 pm

Frank Murphy — September 17, 2010

The first of the emails is my response to Andrew’s email. You may want to read his reply to my September 14 email first which appears second in the thread…

Subject: Vancouver’s Oakridge redevelopment
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:39:51 -0700
From: Frank Murphy <frankmurphy@shaw.ca>
To: Andrew Tucker <Andrew.Tucker@nanaimo.ca>
CC: Mayor&Council <Mayor&Council@nanaimo.ca>, Ted Swabey <Ted.Swabey@nanaimo.ca>, Al Kenning <Alastair.Kenning@nanaimo.ca>

Andrew — As on numerous occasions in the past you’ve responded to my questions promptly and in detail and it’s appreciated.

I anticipated that you would quite rightly point out that there is a dramatic difference in scale between the proposed Oakridge redevelopment and that of Nanaimo’s Port Place. I doubt you’d disagree though that the scale doesn’t preclude the application of the principles of inclusion involving the concerns and aspirations of each of the 3 stakeholder groups.

You have understandably addressed my concerns by recounting official policy and offer the point that these policies were developed with a certain amount of public input. If I understand correctly, I am to accept that this fulfills Council’s and the Planning Department’s responsibility to to engage in an inclusive and collaborative process on individual redevelopment applications to obtain the best possible outcome for all stakeholder groups.

In a nutshell, here’s the reasons I have been given by yourself and your department to my concerns in regards to how the Port Place redevelopment proposal unfolded.

1. We didn’t seek further public input from stakeholders such as the immediately adjacent neighbourhood associations because we were under no legal obligation to so.

2. It’s difficult

and now 3. We’re guided by policies which originally had some public input.

Governed by the same provincial legislation the City of Vancouver initiated a proactively inclusive process which offers a model for future development proposals which will find their way to your department. The model in place that guided the Port Place plan will result in mediocrity and will not meet the needs of all stakeholders.

Any reasonable, objective review of the list of Downtown Plan guiding principles would conclude that with the exception of an arguably improved linkage between downtown and the waterfront, it fails to Read the rest of this entry »

Urban Nation: Why We Need to Give Power Back to the Cities to Make Canada Strong

In CITY GOVERNMENT on September 16, 2010 at 7:24 pm

Frank Murphy — September 16, 2010
This excerpt from Urban Nation: Why We Need to Give Power Back to the Cities to Make Canada Strong offers some suggestions for the badly needed reform of municipal government.

The author is Alan Broadbent, Chair of the Canadian Maytree Foundation, which identifies itself as “committed to reducing poverty and inequality in Canada and to building strong civic communities.”

Among the Maytree Foundation’s initiatives is Ideas that Matter which is based on the wide-ranging ideas and principles of Jane Jacobs.

Jane Jacobs

Here’s background on the book: Maytree Policy in Focus newsletter.

The recommendations I thought might be a good basis for discussion here are:

Political Parties – Most cities in Canada do not have a party system. Adding a party system could help local officials articulate policy, and make the system more comprehensible to the electorate. It could also make consensus easier to obtain because of party discipline – but this is a double-edged sword. If party discipline is too strict, it could prevent a diversity of opinions from reaching council, or limit the influence of local councillors.

Mix of Ward and City-wide Councillors – In Vancouver, councillors are elected city-wide, and the electorate votes for their top 10 Read the rest of this entry »

New Cruise Ship Terminal: Money up the Stack of a Pile Driver

In ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT on September 16, 2010 at 11:20 am

Comment from J. Olson posted here for further comment, discussion

So now the public is informed that someone is spending $22.5 million tax payer dollars on a dock because the cruise ship industry does not like the operational costs associated with tendering ports where they have to use their own crew and life boats to ferry people back and forth to shore even though the industry admits that tendering ports offer a unique aesthetic experience for the tourist. Isn’t this a little like killing the goose that laid the golden egg? Would it not be better to capitalize on this travel experience? Why not build a floating Welcome Centre? Why not employ local folks to operate tendering services to the inner harbour? What is the special tourist experience about when getting on a bus in a dusty parking lot in the middle of an industrial wasteland?

And also, who invented the development plan for the assembly wharf lands that is illustrated in the video? Was a policy statement developed that informs the urban design decisions that must invariably be taken for this area? Was a master plan, transportation, land use, and sustainability plan created for this area? Was there a public consultation process? Was it advertised? Was the City of Nanaimo Planning Department consulted?

Is there any reality here other than money going up the stack of a pile driver while the local community tears its hair out over environmental impacts?

J. Olson

Home

Maffeo Sutton Park Need Food Carts

In EMAILS TO MAYOR / COUNCILLORS on September 16, 2010 at 9:59 am

Jim Taylor —  September 16, 2010
Follows is a portion of an article I posted on my website www.nanaimoblog.com today. I have also sent it as a letter to local press and to each member of council.
I believe it offers a very positive suggestion which should result in a win win win win situation. With that in mind, I expect much resistance. :^)
Maffeo Sutton Park NEEDS Food Vendors

To City Council, staff and Economic Development Committee:

Nanaimo is always looking for ways of promoting itself as a ‘destination’ city for visitors from around the world. We have a world class convention centre and casino of reasonable size, next year we will have a cruise ship terminal designed to entice world travelers to our shores.

With that thought in mind the city should encourage the addition of as varied a bunch of food carts as the business community can think up to occupy Maffeo Sutton Park and our delightful waterfront. Make no mistake, a specialty food, done to perfection will make people come downtown simply to satisfy their taste buds.
This idea of course is the opposite of the current city policy of limiting Maffeo Sutton Park to only one vendor. This is a policy which is difficult to understand and is opposed to the free market system. It is great news if you are the one vendor awarded the contract, but not so good if you happen to want a variety of food to sample.

I propose that city council give considerable thought to the idea of developing a diverse food cart business in our parks and along our lovely seawall. Leave the problems of what types of food to offer to the buying public. If vendors offer unpopular food, they will be gone soon enough. To encourage the development of what could become a reason for visiting downtown, whether you are a resident or a cruise ship passenger, I suggest they offer cart space for half price the first year to entice vendors to participate. This would be a win win win win situation as the business people operating the Read the rest of this entry »

Community TV: We have access; we just need to use it

In UNCATEGORIZED on September 15, 2010 at 12:00 pm

email  from Paul Manly: inaugural meeting of a new community TV production society.

Hello Mid Islanders

You are invited to attend the inaugural meeting of a new community TV production society in the Mid Island region. The purpose of this new organization is to provide programming, which covers social justice and environmental issues, to the community access cable station, Shaw channel 4 in the mid island region (Duncan, Nanaimo, Parksville and Port Alberni).

The meeting takes place

Date: Tuesday 28th September 2010
Time: From 19:00 hrs sharp until 21:00
Place: Pacific Gardens CoHousing Community Dining Hall
347 Seventh Street Nanaimo
(Dial Entry Phone 100)

Background

In 1997 the CRTC relaxed the rules for community TV and the cable giants fired their volunteer coordinators and told their community programmers and volunteers they were no longer welcome. The cable companies professionalized the stations and used the 2% cable levy (which ads up to $116 million across Canada) as a slush fund to advertise their own services. In 2002, the CRTC reaffirmed the right to public access but the cable companies didn’t invite the community back to take on a producing role. That is something we have to do for   Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 34 other followers