One Comment
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Most Recent Columns
- Speaking of Council Pay
- Mea Culpa
- Is it a Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood?
- Neighbourhoods and Developments
- Public Right to Public Information
- SAVING MORDEN MINE: A REMARKABLE GRASS ROOTS ACHIEVEMENT
- Is the Nanaimo Rifle Range Safe?
- The Role of the Public in Public Hearings and Public Meetings
- Governance, the Governors, and the Governed
- Proportional Representation
- The Former Council’s first full Meeting: December 15, 2014
- A TRAVESTY IN THE MAKING: Nanaimo’s proposed Procedure Bylaw 7272
- A BYLAW TO ESTABLISH THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
- DRTEP and YOU and ME
- Coincidence??
NANAIMO PORT AUTHORITY VIDEO: CRUISE SHIP FACILITY
CLICK THE IMAGE FOR THE LINK TO THE VIDEO
_____________________________
CITY COMMITTEES: SCHEDULES, AGENDAS, MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
FINANCE/POLICY
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT
DESIGN ADVISORY PANEL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PLAN NANAIMO ADVISORY COMMITTEE
PARKS RECREATION & CULTURE COMMITTEE
__________________________________
Posts and Comments on Nanaimo Governance 
?issing on Council (and the Public) from a Great Height:
Today’s (April 16, 2010) issue of the Daily News runs a story: “Former city manager wants more money to cover legal fees”, which carries on the tradition of contempt for Council and the public which Mr. Berry, once an outstanding city manager, demonstrated in the last few years of his reign. One cannot know what happened to change his demeanor, but it could be seen in his interactions with both Council and the public at Council and FPCOW meetings and can be observed in videos of Council meetings. One could speculate that it had something to do with the gigantic flop of the Conference Centre, from the illegal referendum for which an underling was forced to pay, to the sudden 40% / $20 million cost increase, to the dismal operating showing of the final product, combined with questions about the sorry showing of the city in dealing with a private “partner” who, in the end, appears to have had little commitment to the project beyond pretense and a promise to “try”.
It seems apparent that Mr. Berry wishes to continue to rub Council’s –and particularly the Mayor’s- nose in the dreck of a separation agreement which seems to carry on the tradition of foolish “contracts” which was set by the previous Council under Mr. Berry’s administration. This is a situation which sheds credit on no one and discredit on many. The root of this last sorry affair should be made public so that it can be laid to rest and appropriate actions can be taken to prevent any replays in the future. Was a secret contract arrangement with Mr. Berry made by our previous Mayor/Council? Or were a couple of newcomers able, almost effortlessly, to upset the applecart and give Mr. Berry a sizable long term claim on the city’s pocketbook?