Letter to CM Kenning re annex seismic upgrade and Freedom of Information request
Attn : Mr. Al Kenning – City Manager :
Dear Mr. Kenning : Re : Freedom of Information
Enclosed is a copy of the Preliminary Cost Estimate dated July 3, 2009 from Herold Engineering Limited pertaining to the proposed $ 6.2 M seismic upgrade for the City Annex Building. This document was sent to me pusuant to a F.O.I. request (City File No. 25-FOI-2010-S). You will see that information as to the preliminary estimated costs has been severed from the disclosure by the City under Section 21 of the F.O.I. and Protection of Privacy Act.
The purpose of this letter is to put on record my strongest possible objection to the City’s position in this matter. There is nothing in Section 21 that can in any manner be construed as being harmful to a third party. I ask that you read this Section to confirm to yourself that my assertion is correct.
I would also point out that in the agenda documents for the December 14, 2009 Council Meeting, specifically the matter of the Centennial Museum Building, staff included a much more detailed report from Herold Engineering, including estimated costs for the various options. Could you therefore please provide an explanation of the City’s policy in the matter of disclosure to the public on this type of information. Why does the City provide estimated costs in one instance (Museum) but refuse to provide any cost information on another matter (Annex)?
I close by asking that the City provide the cost information severed from the Herold report without further delay.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Yours truly
Wayne E. Schulstad
c/c Mayor and Council
Letter to CM Kenning, Preliminary Cost Estimate and Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act documentation here: CM Kenning Apr 26
Wayne Schulstad
Posts and Comments on Nanaimo Governance 
Excerpts from the Citys response to my letter:
1.”Upon further review,I believe that Section 17 of the (act)is perhaps more appropriate than Section 22.However,I do believe that severing of the preliminary estimated costs was correct.”
2.”Should the work recommended in the Herold Report be proceeded with,staff believe that the release of the preliminary cost estimates contained in the document could potentially damage the City’s ability to receive competitive pricing.”
Joan Harrison
Manager of Legislative Services/FOI Head
Note:
Staff’s concern about potentially damaging the competitive bidding process certainly did not apply at the time of their recommendation to demolish the Centennial Museum Building where they provided every cost down to the last dollar.It would appear that staff provides information only when it suits their agenda.
The City Hall Annex is an old sick warehouse building. Lots of lipsick has been slapped on this pig over the years – including an elevator and numerous interior office renovations – would love to know the $ figure spent since we bought it. Air quality has always been an issue. Are we seriously considering throwing more tax payer dollars at this aging and inadequate building?
This situation with the Annex building is interesting.First of all,Staff have inserted $6.2 Million into 2010-2014 Financial Plan to upgrade the structure to comply with deficient seismic requirements identified by Herold Engineering.Mayor Ruttan questioned the logic of spending that amount of money on an old structure and asked City Staff to look at other options.This is good, and possibly the City (read: Taxpayers)will ultimately get better value for their money.
I requested information from the City on the estimated costs for several options in the Herold report,which were provided by Herold but deleted from the information provided to me.What I wanted to know is the difference in costs that were for purely seismic improvements,as opposed to other non-seismic expenditures that may have been added into the Financial Plan.I am of the opinion that the taxpayer should be entitled to this information,if for no other reason then to confirm the money is being spent prudently.
The City thinks otherwise and stonewalled providing the information from day one.They said a freedom of information request was required,and then they took the full 30 business days to deny the request,suggesting it would compromise their efforts to obtain competitive bids for the work.This is a specious argument to say the least as the Herold prices were preliminary estimates only.
So much for the Citys obligation to deal openly with its citizens.The option is still available to make a nF.O.I. request through Victoria and this is likely to happen.
What kind of building can we get on the Dunsmuir property for the $6.2 plus the sale value of the existing annex? Can we get one with secure staff parking on the lower level and a one floor annex? This option may be best in the long run considering that downtown parking is becoming an issue, again.