What’s Up at Monday’s ( Dec. 3) Council Meeting
Ron Bolin: Nov. 30, 2012
A few items caught my eye as I looked through the 311 page agenda for the “official” meeting of Council on Monday, Dec. 3, 2012, 7pm, in the Shaw Auditorium in the Conference Centre. (Boy it’s lucky that Staff got the agenda out late on Thursday or we wouldn’t have time to understand what is going on in those 311 pages –and neither would Council…., eh?)
First was notice of a rescheduled presentation on “NEDC’s activities, the strategic plan and an economic update.” from NEDC CEO Sasha Angus. This should be interesting.
Next comes a recommendation that Council adopt the City of Nanaimo Community Sustainability Action Plan and direct staff to prepare an amendment to the City’s Official Community Plan (OCP) to amend the City’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction target from 33% to 3% of 2007 levels by 2020, and from 80% to 39% of 2007 levels by 2050. The document is about 70 pages long. I am sure that if you visit the City’s web site at: http://www.nanaimo.ca/UploadedFilesPath/Site_Structure/Corporate_Services/Corporate_Administration/2012_Council_Agendas/C121203A.pdf
You will be able to absorb it and get your comments to Council before Monday’s meeting.
Following this we have a development permit; two development variance permits; a couple of Property Maintenance bylaw infractions; four Unresolved Building Deficiencies; a recommendation that Council dispute the charges to developers associated with new developments)(?)); approval of a lease of City land for supportive housing; two leases on the City owned Centennial Museum Building; a report on the “USER FEE SUBSIDY AMENDMENT BYLAW 2012 NO. 7095.01” ; and then we come to:
9(d) Potential Conflict of Interest wherein Staff report that a conflict of interest is not a conflict of interest unless the questionable vote makes a difference to the outcome, an argument which I find very dodgy, at best. Read the Report and make up your own mind. And then comes approval of a collaboration agreement with the school district; and support for a SD 68 grant request;
and then we come to an $800,000 dollar question regarding maintenance to the Nanaimo Centre Stage property which the City purchased a few short years ago. A long report is included in the agenda:
We then end with voting on the adoption of some seven bylaws, correspondence regarding the impact of the water treatment plant on the South Forks community and a possible sop; and two Notices of Motion:
(a) Councillor McKay will be providing notice of a motion regarding a letter of support from Council for Totino Bus to expand services on Vancouver Island. and
(b) Councillor Kipp will be providing notice of a motion for Council to direct Staff to start the process of a core service review (CSR).
There should, but probably won’t, be some interesting discussion on a number of these matters. From an action point of view, as far as I can see, we aren’t hiring anyone new. The report on CSAP (Community Sustainability Action Plan, while it will undoubtedly require some expenditures, does not, as is typical of such reports, contain any estimates of costs or of saving (i.e. the dream is not constrained by any reference to dollars and sense.) The user fee subsidy amendment bylaw which reduces sewer and water user rates to those over 65 and with restricted incomes, does not estimate the cost of this amendment, nor does it indicate how this will be handled for those who rent or lease their abode but do not have a separate water meter. The infrastructure question is starting to rear its head in public with the discussion of the $800,000 need for maintenance. This is a harbinger of the Asset Management report which is due to come out “real soon” which will spell out how many millions of dollars a year it will take to maintain our Billion+ dollars in current assets (let alone the hundreds of millions which we are currently in the process of adding. All in all and unless we get some “last minute” items on Monday, this will be an average spending session at Council.
I hope to see you there, glued to your tv for the meeting or signing on to the City web site for the video record.
Posts and Comments on Nanaimo Governance 
Mr. Bolin presents proposed upgrades to Nanaimo Centre Stage as the “$800,000 dollar question,” in boldface yet, which suggests that this amount is required if the City is to maintain ownership of the property, and that it must be spent immediately. Neither is true. I encourage readers to click on the link Mr. Bolin has provided.
Mr. Moher: I quite agree that citizen taxpayers should look thoroughly through the report which says, very briefly:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That Council direct Staff to include this matter for consideration during the 2013-2017 budget process based on other asset management needs and priorities.
And
Based on their findings RJC recommend the following remediation work be completed:
Total Construction Costs $600,000.00
Engineering & Contingency $200,000.00
TOTAL $800,000.00
That work is for the exterior only and, as you correctly note, can be spent over several years rather than all at once. In fact the report simply asks Council whether to include this property in their asset management plan.
Neither they nor I make any statement about the value of the activities the building houses, but simply note the cost of maintaining it. The resolution is a matter for public discussion. I will note, however, that your long and dedicated service to Nanaimo’s arts and culture activities are noted and appreciated.
Do ya think we will get an apology from Mayor Ruttan with regards to his vote on the Terminal Avenue study? What I would really like to know is if these items where council recuses themselves for potential conflict are discussed in detail at the rehersals they have prior to the meetings. The other potential outcome of this is that if “a conflict of interest is not a conflict of interest unless the questionable vote makes a difference to the outcome,” will this open the door to others voting and then stating that because their vote really made no difference to the outcome it was not a conflict. Another slippery slope; much like making decisions and having illegal referendums, then asking forgiveness from the province after the fact..
Is this the in-camera meeting where the fate of the Nanaimo Centre Stage property is to be settled?
Click to access PN121129SpecialNoticeofCouncilMeeting.pdf
Thanks, Ron. The life-safety items shown in the report amount to $150,000, and I expect the City’s maintenance, if there is to be any, should be restricted to that. One of the disjunctions that occur when government and arts organizations find themselves in partnerships is that government will often feel obliged to pursue Cadillac solutions, while artists have learned to be content with Studebakers.
Speaking of maintenance, I appreciate your maintaining this blog, which is how I became aware of the matter.
You are spot on about government and any non infrastructure service. If it gets involved, it gets over involved… What ever happened to Mickey and Judy and a barn?
And,of course, what happens to our infrastructure. We are about to find out how many millions of dollars we are in arrears.
Regarding Council’s Agenda for December 3, 2012, and specifically, Coun. Kipp’s Notice of Motion for Council to direct Staff to start the process of a core service review, I wrote the following on this blog on December 4, 2010 …. two years ago! … (Was related to Council’s meeting of November 8, 2010.)
—
With respect to municipal spending in Nanaimo –
At the Regular Meeting of Council held on November 8th, Council directed Staff to:
1. “start the process of a core service review”
– amended motion carried as follows: “report back to council on the content and estimated time and cost of a core service review”; and
2. “report on the process of a zero based budget”
– amended motion carried to include the wording: “for the 2012 budget year.”
Staff works in mysterious (and slow) ways their wonders to perform. Two years is about the same time it took them to look seriously at some action after the 2010 dam report which estimated that ten people would be killed if the dams broke.
Janet: Have you contacted Jim or Staff to see what happened to those motions? Do you know if Council has set any parameters for Staff in developing the 2013 budget or the 2013-2017 Financial Plan?
Wanna bet, if councilor Kipp’s motion actually passes??? I’m betting Brennan, Johnstone, Pattje, Anderson and Mayor Ruttan will kill it.
Any takers??
As for the building on Victoria Rd., the staff report puts costs at $800,000, but if you actually read the engineers report, they say $925,000.00 plus HST. The arts community might have better uses for this money if the city has a spare million to support them with.
Ron Bolin @ 3 December 2012 at 8am –
Janet: Have you contacted Jim or Staff to see what happened to those motions? Do you know if Council has set any parameters for Staff in developing the 2013 budget or the 2013-2017 Financial Plan?
—-
Ron: Have not contacted Coun. Kipp about the core service review. I have contacted him only once … a couple of years ago … I sent him a friendly email on another matter, as he was then the Council representative on a certain Committee of Council and I was disappointed, to say the least, when my message was not acknowledged.
I do not think that expecting to receive an acknowledgment is too high an expectation, do you? To be clear, I do respect their time, and in turn, I expect the same. I also believe in contributing and being part of the solution.
Perhaps, I should try once again!
The answer to your second question, Ron, is that I do not know.
Ron: One of the agenda items you refer to is the $800,000 question regarding maintenance to the Nanaimo Centre Stage property.
In 2008, the Council of the day purchased the building at 25 Victoria Road, which became known as Nanaimo Centre Stage. 2008 was an Election Year and this issue was very controversial.
On November 22, 2008, the Nanaimo Daily News reported the following, and I quote:
“The City of Nanaimo paid $460,000 to purchase the former church last spring. Since then, the centre has been undergoing modifications, at an estimated cost of $150,000.
The purchase made headlines when outgoing mayor Gary Korpan called the building “earthquake bait” that would cost the taxpayer a large amount of cash to repair and maintain. The comments drew the scorn of residents in the area and arts groups, which maintain that a small performing arts space is needed.” [end quote]
————–
I wonder who performed due diligence on behalf of the purchasers, (all Nanaimo taxpayers) ….and were they not also going to be responsible for the very costly maintenance of the building? The Nanaimo Entertainment Centre at 46 Nicol St. (formerly Caprice Theatre), is a neighbour of the taxpayer-owned building at 25 Victoria Road and, as I recall, its owner was renovating it, around the same time as the City’s purchase of 25 Victoria Road.
Voting on a failed motion is still a conflict interest. I offer the following conjecture. Council meets in Camera to vote on a motion to spend $5 million to demolish dams in Harewood Park. Four Councillors vote yes and five vote no saying the budget is inadequate. The motion is defeated. Some one then moves to increase the budget to $7 million and asks for another vote. As before four Councillors vote yes but the remaining five abstain from voting now citing a conflict of interest. The increased budget passes four to zero.