Bright Lights, Paperless Dogs, and Perpetual Golf - Meeting of Jan. 26, 2009
START - 7:01 PM
ABSENTEES - none.
PUBLIC GALLERY - Brian Clavier, Pearl Morin, Dave Maksemiuk, Rick Potratz, Ken Noskye (after start of meeting, left early), Donald Prentice, Greg Boulet (left early) City Building Inspector, Fire Department employee, and five others.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS - 547 pages
VENUE ALTERATION - The two loudspeakers that were on the floor two weeks ago have disappeared, replaced by four smaller ones in the middle of the ceiling.
Pecuniary Interest Form Submission Request
- For the tenth consecutive meeting, the Mayor requested the submission of these forms. Again, no explanation for this was given. [Maybe council members are buying and selling properties so fast that they need to submit a new form every two weeks.]
Group Home on Muir Drive
- Councillor Gervais felt it necessary, in spite of neither written nor oral objections to this proposal, to say that the existing home run by the same proponents in Ward 1 is a "top-notch facility," and that he has no problems with them.
- THE VOTE (to approve the application): 9 - 0 in favour.
Bylaw 29 Public Hearing - Allow Discretionary Telecommunication Towers up to 45 Meters High on Land Zoned C3, C4, C5, M1, M2, and M3
- Brian Clavier spoke against the proposed bylaw, on the basis that zoning is arbitrary (Advantage Credit Union property is split into M2 and C2 on the zoning map); the location for the Credit Union tower is in a river valley, very close to the 2nd Avenue hill (necessitating an additional 50 feet in tower height just to be above the hill); residential areas are located just north and south of this proposed tower's location; the tower will interfere with AM radio (like the two towers at PACI and the corner of 22nd St. and 2nd Ave. West); nothing in the report addresses radio interference from the proposed tower; and there are other locations that are better sites for the tower (for example, the Credit Union's property and 15th St. East, or the 6th Ave. West site where a Rogers cell phone tower was approved seven years ago, but not yet built).
- THE VOTE (to refer to bylaw section of the meeting): in favour.
Bylaw 1 Public Hearing - to Renew the City's Line of Credit at Bank of Montreal
- Brian Clavier spoke in favour of option 1 in the report from administration (a short-term debt limit of $12 million - which, combined with the city's $20 million long-term debt, would give a maximum total debt of $32 million) and against option 2, which suggested council could pick a lower or higher number for the line-of-credit limit. He agreed with the report's author that a lower amount might be insufficient, and a higher limit might result in uncontrolled spending.
- Councillor Atkinson asked what date the city typically stops using its line of credit, due to sufficient money being available from property tax payments and other income. The Director replied that in 2008 it was at the end of October. Atkinson asked how this date has changed over the past five years. The Director did not reply directly, saying that in the last three years, the cost of using the line of credit has not been a burden, and that in 2008 using the line of credit cost the city $4400.
- THE VOTE (to refer option 1 to bylaw section of the meeting): 9 - 0 in favour.
Maintenance Bylaw Appeal - 219-9th St. East
- Dave Maksemiuk expanded on the content of his appeal letter, stating that he ordered new windows on Jan. 5, they will arrive by mid-February, he is doing the required drywall installation this week, and he would like an extension until March 15 to complete the work.
- Councillor Dionne [this location is in Ward 2, which he represents] asked if Mr. Maxemiuk needed more time to ensure completion of the work, since it is difficult to install windows when it is cold. A March 31 deadline was agreed upon.
- THE VOTE (to extend the work completion deadline to March 31, 2009): 9 - 0 in favour.
7:22 PM
Complaint about Northern Lights Casino Spotlights
- Greg Boulet expanded on the content of his letter to council. He referred to Matthew chapter 20 in the Bible to explain why he cannot call the Mayor "your worship." He said his grandfather would view the casino spotlights as disrespectful to people, and the city solicitor's report was not helpful because it creates a circular situation (where the province may provide a sample bylaw, and the city is waiting for the province to do something about regulating such lights). He said the Mayor has the power to ensure compliance with a bylaw that would regulate these spotlights. Mr Boulet said that, for him, "it is against God's laws to sue" the casino for infringing on his rights, as suggested by the city solicitor. He added that the spotlights are disgusting, and council should not pit one citizen against another.
- Mayor Scarrow, in reply to Mr. Boulet's comments, asked that he to send his letter to the relevant agencies. Mr Boulet tried to respond (from the gallery) that he could not, but was reminded that he had already had his turn at the microphone.
- THE VOTE (to receive and file the correspondence): 6 - 2 in favour (Councillors Atkinson and Williams opposed, Mayor Scarrow's vote not discernible).
Traffic Lights at 15th Ave. East & Muzzy Drive
- Councillor Ring initially moved that this request be referred to public works and the 2009 budget deliberations, but Councillor Atkinson asked that it be sent to the joint city-school board committee. Atkinson noted that most infrastructure in this area of the city is inadequate, all jurisidctions involved should review this, and new developments in the area need to be factored in. Councillors Swystun and Zurakowski noted the current information is inadeqaute.
- Councillor Matheson was worried that referring to the joint schoool board-city committee might delay things.
- THE VOTE (to have traffic information updated, and refer to joint committee): 9 - 0 in favour.
Shore Gold Open House on February 5
- Councillor Swystun called the Shore Gold diamond mine proposal in the Fort a la Corne provincial forest "mind-boggling," and said the February 5 open house (3 to 8 PM at the Sask. Forest Centre) will deal with heritage, archeological, forestry, fisheries, and local consultation issues.
7:42 PM
Road Closure to Create More Parking Spaces at 658 River St. East
- Councilllor Atkinson asked how many parking spaces would be needed if this project was not a seniors' building. Director Joan Corneil did not know the answer to that question. Mayor Scarrow asked for a definition of "senior." The Director deferred her answer until after she consults a dictionary. The Mayor replied it is 55 years and over.
- THE VOTE (to refer Bylaw 38 to the bylaws section of the meeting): 7 - 2 in favour, Councillors Atkinson and Williams opposed.
Yet Another Version of the Art Hauser Centre Financial Statements for 2007
- Councillor Swystun, the Chair of the Art Hauser Board, referred these back to administration for further work.
[At a minimum, there need to be explanations for 1) the concession operation at the facility reporting neither income nor a loss, and 2) how "cash" can be "classified as financial assets available-for-sale," as described at the bottom of page 502 (meaning the Zamboni can apparently be included in the "cash" column).]
Joining the UNESCO-sponsored Coalition of Municipalities Against Racism and Discrimination
- Councillor Swystun noted UNESCO has developed 10 principles for dealing with racism and discrimination.
- Councillor Atkinson noted that any junkets anticipated as a result of joining the coalition have budget impacts that need to be considered.
Last-Minute Agenda Addition to Update Progress on the Soccer/Fieldhouse Project
- City Manager Cotterill, who reported in November 2008 that piling costs woudl be over budget, now says $35,000 was actually saved on that tender. Seventeen tenders closed in early January 2009, and these are $1.2 million (16%) over budget - which doesn't surprise him. $700,000 in options on these tenders have been proposed. Donations are up $110,000 from the November report. The over-budget amount is now predicted at $600,000, although the contingency figure can handle this. Next report to council on this is next month. Half of the 17 tenders are from local contractors.
- Councillor Atkinson asked if there are any numbers yet for the annual operating cost. Cotterill replied the forecast is $150,000 to $200,000. A final figure will be available during budget discussions, but it will only be for the soccer portion of the building in 2009.
- Councillor Dionne asked if council would also see the building's fee structure at budget discussions, adding that "user-pay" is applied at other city facilities. Cotterill replied, "yes."
7:58 PM
Problems with the Landfill Compactor Tender
- Councillor Atkinson asked if the cost of fencing and a loader operator had been included, as these will affect the sanitation budget. The Director referred to page 114 - the sanitation budget will have a reserve of $951,600 minus the compactor equals $817,600.
- Councillor Ring said we previously went with a baler, assuming it would get 800 kg/cubic meter, but we have only been able to get 600 kg/cubic meter. The cost savings from the portable compactor will move us from a predicted 75-year life for the landfill back to the originally-predicted life of 94 years.
- Councillor Swystun said the switch to the new compactor will save $260,000.
- Councilllor Williams expressed a preference for shredding garbage, as well as better sorting and salvaging. He has already had such discussions with the department.
Events Attended by the Mayor and Councillors
- Councillors Williams and Matheson, plus the Mayor, attended the benefit for Blair Morgan.
- Mayor Scarrow was at a Wesmor High School dinner, a ceremony to honour Ryan Harrison's contribution to the Team Canada junior hockey gold medal, and the Alzheimer's walk.
8:07 PM
Inquiries about Train Tracks, LED Signs, and Examining Dog Genitalia
- Councillor Dionne asked if the train tracks in wards 1 and 2 can be cleaned in the spring.
- Councillor Williams requested a report (vote: 9 - 0 in favour) on school zone signs that have LED lights in them (to compensate for the invisible pavement markings in winter).
- Councillor Atkinson related the story of a woman who wanted to renew her 10-year-old dog's license, but was unable to produce the spay/neuter record for the SPCA. How can she prove the spay/neuter procedure was done? The Mayor asked if Atkinson was suggesting an inspector be hired to verify the procedure. The City Manager will talk to the SPCA. The Mayor admitted to a "Bushism." Councillor Gervais was able to get his dog's records from 8 or 9 years ago.
- Councillor Zurakowski asked if there were any plans for an off-leash dog area. The Director indicated there were no such plans right now.
Bylaw Procedure Confusion
- The City Clerk reminded council that bylaws have to be removed (by a motion) if they are not being dealt with according to the text of the order paper.
Motions: Naming Soccer Fields, Perpetual Golf Course
- Councillor Zurakowski asked that his motion to name the three soccer fields in Primce Ministers Park after Prime Ministers Wilfrid Laurier, John Diefenbaker, and Mackenzie King be postponed to "the next cycle" of council. Council consented, by a 9 - 0 vote.
- Mayor Scarrow moved to have administration prepare a report on preserving and protecting the Cooke golf course, in perpetuity. Councillor Williams asked whether this has to be done in conjunction with the provincial heritage designation process, and if any golf courses have received such a designation. The Director replied that this would be taken into consideration. Councillor Ring noted that the motion reflects concerns raise durng the 2004-2005 golf course review, when discussions of privatization, housing projects, and selling the course stirred up the golfing community. A protected aboriginal site already exists on the course. Councillor Swystun said that the Golf and Curling Club may also seek a different use for the golf course at some time in the future. THE VOTE (to send to administration for a report): 5 in favour, 4 abstentions (vote too quick to discern who abstained).
Public Forum
- Donald Prentice, responsible for clearing snow at 80 - 13th St West, was upset about being cited for not clearing the snow there - "Me and the bylaw people don't get along." He sees other locations on the same street that don't get citations for their failure to clear snow.
[Brian Clavier did not speak at public forum, as he was still suffering the ill effects of a cold.]
Always the Last Word . . . .
- Mayor Scarrow recognized Joe Day's appointment as Director of Financial Services, thanked the administration for their work, was "delighted that Shaw [Cable] are here," and thanked the reporters present from the Herald, CTV, and Rawlco radio.
ADJOURNED 8:22 PM
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Off the Rails 1
"State-of-the-City" Speech - January 22, 2009*
The tradition of select Saskatchewan cities' mayors giving "state-of-the-city" addresses to the local business community is based on bland mimicry of the annual State-of-the-Union address given by the President of the United States. The latter address, broadcast from a combined session of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate, takes over American TV during the same week that the Mayor of Prince Albert gives his speech. Fortunately, there is no parallel parade of pompous puffery in either Ottawa or Regina.
In Prince Albert, the speeches are given at a luncheon sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce. The luncheon is always sold out in advance. It is held at either the Travelodge or the Marlboro Hotel. I personally believe that the speech would be more relevant to the community if it were given at the West Flat Community Centre, Nordale Hall, East End Hall, or Parkland Hall. It would also be fair to rotate the event among these locations, but I'm not sure those venues would sell out . . . .
Both the State-of-the-Union address and the State-of-the-City speech are characterized by extreme enthusiasm, lengthy recitations of the preceding year's spectacular successes, and minimal respect for verifiable fact (see "Incoming - U238!" below). The speeches by Dubya Bush (thankfully, now exiled to his homes in Texas) were noteworthy for their simplicity - a quality that miraculously produced bouts of wild applause and serious harrumphs from the assembled elite in the US Capitol Building equal to the groans and expletives emanating from Canadians who watched the broadcasts.
State-of-the-City addresses by our current mayor distinguish themselves with exceptionally bad grammar (see "Hunh?!?" below). Whatever the source of these errors, fear of offending His Worship blunts any corrective impulses. A closer look at what was said last week illuminates a few of the more glaring examples.**
Hunh ?!?
Persistent use of bad grammar and syntax indicates three things: the speaker is poorly educated, has no desire to change, and has no interest in being clearly understood by his audience. Sadly, people for whom grammar and syntax are important are frequently called "anal retentive." In defense of linguistic wardens everywhere, I think of proper use of a language (English, Cree, French, or any other) as showing respect for the listener's intelligence, and simultaneously trying to make it as easy as possible for them to comprehend the ideas being conveyed. The following recitation of crime statistics, reproduced verbatim from page 6 of the text of the Mayor's January 22 State-of-the-City address, assaults the reader's intelligence.
"Crimes Against Person is up marginally at 2% with 15 more offences.
Crimes Against Property is down 9% our single biggest gain - nearly 300 less offenses.
B&E's at residences, the one that affects most people, is down 34%."
The errors in these three sentences are: incorrect use of singular verbs, spelling inconsistency, a non sequitur [Latin for "does not follow logically"], and incorrect choice of a quantifier. The corrected version of the text, punctuated so that it can be easily read and clearly understood, is as follows [red ink indicates changes].
"'Crimes against persons' are up marginally, at 2%, with 15 more offenses.
'Crimes against property' are down 9%. This category is our single biggest
improvement, representing nearly 300 fewer offenses.
'Break-and-enters at residences', the crime that affects most people, are down 34%."
That's what the Mayor should have said. Here's what he actually said, punctuated accordingly.
"'Crimes against persons' are up marginally, 2%, about 15 more offenses.
'Crimes against property' is down 9%, our single biggest gain, nearly 300 less offenses.
And here's one that comes close to home, because it's about your home. And B-and-Es - break-and-entries-at-residence - is down 34%. That's a third. Thirty-four per cent. Way to go."
Apparently, the noun "crimes" is unequivocally both plural and singular, being "down 9%" is a "gain," and I will always have "less" dollars than you.
Please Clarify - Where's the Money?
The Mayor said that the average residential home in PA is selling for $180,126, "a 34% increase from last year and a 38% increase from just two years ago. Remember, as a home owner, all of this value goes in your wallet, not the taxman's."
I bought a home in 2008 - for less than $180,126. It was way over-priced, but still cheaper than renting, since my rent was being increased by 60% on July 1. The "value" of my home went into the wallets of the we-won't-repair-anything-the-house-inspector-found-or-reduce-the-price sellers, not my wallet. The municipal taxman's wallet will get fatter three years down the road, when revaluation occurs in 2012 - and I'm partially to blame, since I paid an excessive price for my home. "Remember, as a home owner," house re-sale values in PA have dropped since the summer of 2008, so my house's "value" is down. Fortunately, its "value" is irrelevant until I try to sell it or I can't make the payments. Of course, if I sold it tomorrow I would have no place to live, but I would have the pride of knowing that the sale boosted the numbers the real estate board and the Mayor crow about.
Maybe I should stop fretting, and accept what the Mayor says on page 8 of his State-of-the-City address: "It's All About Money! ['Repeat, repeat' was added for the live audience.] It's All About Money!" I would cheerfully acquiesce, but I can't help thinking this is an echo of Gordon Gekko (a character played by Michael Douglas in the 1987 movie Wall Street), whose creed was "Greed is good."
How Does a "Target" Get Carved in Stone?
In his speech, the Mayor said, "I assure you that in 2009 we will target a zero increase in taxes and do everything we can to reach that goal . . . That might be subject to some applause. I assumed you were in shock."
I'm confused: when he wore his hat as Chair of the Police Commission at the council meeting 10 days earlier, the Mayor had no problem approving a 6.92% increase to the police service operating budget (set at $9.979 million for 2009). Seriously, he gave State-of-the-City luncheon attendees notice that "zero" was a 2009 property tax increase "target," then let his exuberance get the better of him when being interviewed by the media afterward, suddenly declaring to them that there would be no increase in property taxes. There's definitely a devil in that detail.
Incoming - U238!
Like many civic leaders in Prince Albert, the Mayor is excited about the potential for uranium industry expansion. In his State-of-the-City address, he pointed out that "Currently, we mine the uranium, mill it into yellowcake, and then truck it to Ontario to be transformed into fuel for reactors. It's a simple scenario - uranium supplies are lower than expected, demand is growing, prices are going up." If prices are "going up," then maybe we should all buy stock in these companies.
Unfortunately, I can't find evidence that uranium prices have been"going up" lately - and I looked really hard. Specifically, this
graph, reproduced from InfoMine.com on January 26, 2009, shows the price of uranium for a two-year period that began on January 26, 2007. It's a bit hard to see, but the price today is $51 US per pound - higher than the two-year low of $44, set in late October 2008 - but also $85 per pound less than the high of $136 set in late June 2007 (that's a drop of 63% in 19 months). The blue line in the graph tells the story best: over the past two years, uranium prices have not been "going up," they've been falling. You might want to hold off on the share purchases.
On the other hand, maybe my analysis is too short-term. Looking at a ten-year graph of uranium prices, like the one on the right, we see that the blue line does rise. The $50-per-pound price was first achieved in late summer 2006. For the six-and-a-half years prior to June 2005, however, the price was always under $25 per pound - less than half the January 26, 2009 price of $51.
Iogen - Again, and Again, and Again . . . et cetera
If I had a dollar for every time in the last ten years that I've heard someone say the Iogen ethanol plant announcement is just around the corner, I could pay my heating bill for the next six months. On January 22, 2009, the Mayor of PA said: "I believe this mega-project is a breath away from being announced." He proceeded to give us "the math" - $250 million in construction costs, with "630 direct and spin-off jobs upon completion."
I'm just a victim of reality, of course, but these claims don't seem to match the content of a May 12, 2008 article in our local daily newspaper, where the Reeve of the RM of Birch Hills, "who has been trying to bring such a plant to his community since 1999," states that "'There’d be 80 to 90 jobs at the [ethanol] plant,' with a spin-off effect of 1.4 to 1.7 jobs for each one at the facility." At the high end, then, Reeve Mickelson figures there would be 90+(90 x 1.7) new jobs - a total of 243. After 10 years of work on this file, the Reeve knows more than a bit about ethanol plants, so I think we should trust his numbers. That means that the 630 jobs claimed by the Mayor represent excess optimism of at least 387 jobs - or at least 159% more than what regional economic development planning for this development should take into account.
-----------------------------------------------------
Later today - the January 26, 2009 council meeting notes.
-----------------------------------------------------
* This evaluation of the January 22, 2009 State-of-the-City address by the Mayor of Prince Albert is based on a close comparison of the 13-page written version, posted on the city's web site, and the 33-minute video clip of the speech posted on www.paherald.sk.ca.
** Perhaps they should be projected onto the south wall of the Rawlinson Centre, or into the night sky by the casino's six over-sized spotlights, as a way of helping the city's young scholars avoid making the same mistakes.
The tradition of select Saskatchewan cities' mayors giving "state-of-the-city" addresses to the local business community is based on bland mimicry of the annual State-of-the-Union address given by the President of the United States. The latter address, broadcast from a combined session of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate, takes over American TV during the same week that the Mayor of Prince Albert gives his speech. Fortunately, there is no parallel parade of pompous puffery in either Ottawa or Regina.
In Prince Albert, the speeches are given at a luncheon sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce. The luncheon is always sold out in advance. It is held at either the Travelodge or the Marlboro Hotel. I personally believe that the speech would be more relevant to the community if it were given at the West Flat Community Centre, Nordale Hall, East End Hall, or Parkland Hall. It would also be fair to rotate the event among these locations, but I'm not sure those venues would sell out . . . .
Both the State-of-the-Union address and the State-of-the-City speech are characterized by extreme enthusiasm, lengthy recitations of the preceding year's spectacular successes, and minimal respect for verifiable fact (see "Incoming - U238!" below). The speeches by Dubya Bush (thankfully, now exiled to his homes in Texas) were noteworthy for their simplicity - a quality that miraculously produced bouts of wild applause and serious harrumphs from the assembled elite in the US Capitol Building equal to the groans and expletives emanating from Canadians who watched the broadcasts.
State-of-the-City addresses by our current mayor distinguish themselves with exceptionally bad grammar (see "Hunh?!?" below). Whatever the source of these errors, fear of offending His Worship blunts any corrective impulses. A closer look at what was said last week illuminates a few of the more glaring examples.**
Hunh ?!?
Persistent use of bad grammar and syntax indicates three things: the speaker is poorly educated, has no desire to change, and has no interest in being clearly understood by his audience. Sadly, people for whom grammar and syntax are important are frequently called "anal retentive." In defense of linguistic wardens everywhere, I think of proper use of a language (English, Cree, French, or any other) as showing respect for the listener's intelligence, and simultaneously trying to make it as easy as possible for them to comprehend the ideas being conveyed. The following recitation of crime statistics, reproduced verbatim from page 6 of the text of the Mayor's January 22 State-of-the-City address, assaults the reader's intelligence.
"Crimes Against Person is up marginally at 2% with 15 more offences.
Crimes Against Property is down 9% our single biggest gain - nearly 300 less offenses.
B&E's at residences, the one that affects most people, is down 34%."
The errors in these three sentences are: incorrect use of singular verbs, spelling inconsistency, a non sequitur [Latin for "does not follow logically"], and incorrect choice of a quantifier. The corrected version of the text, punctuated so that it can be easily read and clearly understood, is as follows [red ink indicates changes].
"'Crimes against persons' are up marginally, at 2%, with 15 more offenses.
'Crimes against property' are down 9%. This category is our single biggest
improvement, representing nearly 300 fewer offenses.
'Break-and-enters at residences', the crime that affects most people, are down 34%."
That's what the Mayor should have said. Here's what he actually said, punctuated accordingly.
"'Crimes against persons' are up marginally, 2%, about 15 more offenses.
'Crimes against property' is down 9%, our single biggest gain, nearly 300 less offenses.
And here's one that comes close to home, because it's about your home. And B-and-Es - break-and-entries-at-residence - is down 34%. That's a third. Thirty-four per cent. Way to go."
Apparently, the noun "crimes" is unequivocally both plural and singular, being "down 9%" is a "gain," and I will always have "less" dollars than you.
Please Clarify - Where's the Money?
The Mayor said that the average residential home in PA is selling for $180,126, "a 34% increase from last year and a 38% increase from just two years ago. Remember, as a home owner, all of this value goes in your wallet, not the taxman's."
I bought a home in 2008 - for less than $180,126. It was way over-priced, but still cheaper than renting, since my rent was being increased by 60% on July 1. The "value" of my home went into the wallets of the we-won't-repair-anything-the-house-inspector-found-or-reduce-the-price sellers, not my wallet. The municipal taxman's wallet will get fatter three years down the road, when revaluation occurs in 2012 - and I'm partially to blame, since I paid an excessive price for my home. "Remember, as a home owner," house re-sale values in PA have dropped since the summer of 2008, so my house's "value" is down. Fortunately, its "value" is irrelevant until I try to sell it or I can't make the payments. Of course, if I sold it tomorrow I would have no place to live, but I would have the pride of knowing that the sale boosted the numbers the real estate board and the Mayor crow about.
Maybe I should stop fretting, and accept what the Mayor says on page 8 of his State-of-the-City address: "It's All About Money! ['Repeat, repeat' was added for the live audience.] It's All About Money!" I would cheerfully acquiesce, but I can't help thinking this is an echo of Gordon Gekko (a character played by Michael Douglas in the 1987 movie Wall Street), whose creed was "Greed is good."
How Does a "Target" Get Carved in Stone?
In his speech, the Mayor said, "I assure you that in 2009 we will target a zero increase in taxes and do everything we can to reach that goal . . . That might be subject to some applause. I assumed you were in shock."
I'm confused: when he wore his hat as Chair of the Police Commission at the council meeting 10 days earlier, the Mayor had no problem approving a 6.92% increase to the police service operating budget (set at $9.979 million for 2009). Seriously, he gave State-of-the-City luncheon attendees notice that "zero" was a 2009 property tax increase "target," then let his exuberance get the better of him when being interviewed by the media afterward, suddenly declaring to them that there would be no increase in property taxes. There's definitely a devil in that detail.
Incoming - U238!
Like many civic leaders in Prince Albert, the Mayor is excited about the potential for uranium industry expansion. In his State-of-the-City address, he pointed out that "Currently, we mine the uranium, mill it into yellowcake, and then truck it to Ontario to be transformed into fuel for reactors. It's a simple scenario - uranium supplies are lower than expected, demand is growing, prices are going up." If prices are "going up," then maybe we should all buy stock in these companies.
Unfortunately, I can't find evidence that uranium prices have been"going up" lately - and I looked really hard. Specifically, this
graph, reproduced from InfoMine.com on January 26, 2009, shows the price of uranium for a two-year period that began on January 26, 2007. It's a bit hard to see, but the price today is $51 US per pound - higher than the two-year low of $44, set in late October 2008 - but also $85 per pound less than the high of $136 set in late June 2007 (that's a drop of 63% in 19 months). The blue line in the graph tells the story best: over the past two years, uranium prices have not been "going up," they've been falling. You might want to hold off on the share purchases.
On the other hand, maybe my analysis is too short-term. Looking at a ten-year graph of uranium prices, like the one on the right, we see that the blue line does rise. The $50-per-pound price was first achieved in late summer 2006. For the six-and-a-half years prior to June 2005, however, the price was always under $25 per pound - less than half the January 26, 2009 price of $51.
Iogen - Again, and Again, and Again . . . et cetera
If I had a dollar for every time in the last ten years that I've heard someone say the Iogen ethanol plant announcement is just around the corner, I could pay my heating bill for the next six months. On January 22, 2009, the Mayor of PA said: "I believe this mega-project is a breath away from being announced." He proceeded to give us "the math" - $250 million in construction costs, with "630 direct and spin-off jobs upon completion."
I'm just a victim of reality, of course, but these claims don't seem to match the content of a May 12, 2008 article in our local daily newspaper, where the Reeve of the RM of Birch Hills, "who has been trying to bring such a plant to his community since 1999," states that "'There’d be 80 to 90 jobs at the [ethanol] plant,' with a spin-off effect of 1.4 to 1.7 jobs for each one at the facility." At the high end, then, Reeve Mickelson figures there would be 90+(90 x 1.7) new jobs - a total of 243. After 10 years of work on this file, the Reeve knows more than a bit about ethanol plants, so I think we should trust his numbers. That means that the 630 jobs claimed by the Mayor represent excess optimism of at least 387 jobs - or at least 159% more than what regional economic development planning for this development should take into account.
-----------------------------------------------------
Later today - the January 26, 2009 council meeting notes.
-----------------------------------------------------
* This evaluation of the January 22, 2009 State-of-the-City address by the Mayor of Prince Albert is based on a close comparison of the 13-page written version, posted on the city's web site, and the 33-minute video clip of the speech posted on www.paherald.sk.ca.
** Perhaps they should be projected onto the south wall of the Rawlinson Centre, or into the night sky by the casino's six over-sized spotlights, as a way of helping the city's young scholars avoid making the same mistakes.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
1st Regular Meeting of 2009
Police & Planning - Meeting of Jan. 12, 2009
START - 7:01 PM
ABSENT - Councillor Dionne
PUBLIC GALLERY - Brian Clavier, Police Chief Dale McFee (after meeting started), Herald reporter Matthew Gauk (after 7:30)
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS - 137 pages
VENUE ALTERATION - Two loudspeakers now sit in the middle of the floor, facing council, just on the council side of the barrier that separates the public area from council's part of the room. These are connected to all microphones, so that council members can hear themselves and speakers at the podium more clearly.
Pecuniary Interest Form Submission Request
- For the ninth consecutive meeting, submission of these forms was requested by the Mayor. [Either some members of council still haven't submitted, and a simple request is insufficient, or no one has seen fit to remove this item from the agenda].
Bylaw 38 Public Hearing - Sale of Land to Allow More Parking Spaces at 658 River St. East Condo Project
- Brian Clavier spoke against the bylaw, based on parking not being a "public good," parking spaces (valuable land) being useless for any other purpose, the need for the city to give developers incentives to reduce parking spaces, the large amount of land already taken up by asphalt (especially in the downtown core), and potential interference with the Rotary Trail (currently on-street between 5th and 8th Avenue on River Street East).
- Councillor Zurakowski asked if the location of the Rotary Trail has been determined at this point on River Street. The Director said it will go on the sidewalk there (it's 5-feet wide).
- Councillor Atkinson noted this street is a snow route, there should be reduced parking requirements for this building (a seniors' complex), and the extra parking area may be detrimental for parking associated with the new Habitat for Humanity house on the corner of 4th and River Street.
- THE VOTE (to be considered in the bylaws portion of this meeting): 6 - 2 in favour(Councillors Atkinson and Williams opposed).
Extension of Art Hauser Ice Surface Season to Accommodate Sask. Uranium Mines Hockey Tournament on April 3-4, 2009
- Councillor Ring wanted to know how much the organizers were prepared to pay for this, and what related revenue the city would get from this tournament.
- Councillor Atkinson asked whether the 2007 financial statements for the Art Hasuer Centre were on the city web site. The administration reply was: these were seen by council, but sent back to finance for finalization; they will return to council, then be posted online.
- Councillor Swystun [member of Art Hauser Centre Board] recalled that the statements showed "underspending by thousands of dollars."
- Councillor Zurakowski supported Swystun's recollection.
- THE VOTE (to refer back to administration for a report on the cost of extending the ice surface season at all three indoor rinks): 8 - 0 in favour.
Youth Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes from December 3, 2008
- there weren't any minutes, since there was no quorum at that meeting.
Bylaw 47 - First Reading of Bylaw to Approve Rural Residential Development on Highway 2 West of Red Wing Terrace (RM of Buckland) and North Side of Highway 302 (RM of PA) on the East Edge of the City
- Councillor Swystun declared a conflict of interest on this item, and excused himself. [It was not clear which of the two developments were the concern for him.]
- THE VOTE (to refer to bylaws section of this meeting for further consideration): 7 - 0 in favour.
Police Service Operating Budget ($9.979 million, up 6.97%) and Capital Budget (total $518,525, up 27%)
- Background: the total Police Commission expenses budget for 2009 is $17,983, up 7.42%. The $20,000 Draganflyer mini-helicopter (see photo) is being held back as a "mid-year" purchase, as are "throw phones" for the SWAT team and holding cell renovations ($39,525 for these two items). The Pandila law office building is being purchased for police use - for $51,000 per year, over 20 years.
- Councillor Atkinson asked about the four new officers that Councillor Dionne had spoken of at an earlier meeting: was the province giving base funding only, or did this grant include auxiliary costs (computer, office space, uniform, etc.)? Chief McFee replied that auxiliary costs are included - meaning the city gets $90,000 per officer (though the Sask. Police Association, which he heads, is asking that this be increased to $100,000). Atkinson then asked about the staffing levels at the Police Service. McFee replied there are 83 sworn officers, 5 bylaw officers, and about 23 civilian support staff. Atkinson said Moose Jaw has a total of just 87 staff. McFee replied we should not be compared with Moose Jaw (due to vastly different workloads - for example, in 2007 there were 4 public intoxication arrests in Moose Jaw and 1900 in PA), but to Saskatoon and Regina. Police statistics to be released in a few weeks will show declines in crime in PA.
- Councillor Zurakowski asked if the current service directions were sustainable. McFee replied that the Board [Police Commission] looks for sustainable revenue sources, and will continue its "intelligence-based, proactive" direction.
- Councillor Ring asked if there is pay parity with other jurisdictions' police officers. McFee replied that more people now apply to PA from other police services than he has ever seen in the past.
- Mayor Scarrow moved that the reference to "Dragonfly" in the capital budget be changed to "video surveillance" [since the latter is what the Draganflyer DOES, it can still be purchased using the latter designation]. McFee said a "stealth cam" would be useful on the river bank, or on the bridge. [No reference was made to potential right-to-privacy or similar civil rights issues.]
- Councillor Atkinson asked, given the Pandila purchase, what will happen to the Central Avenue sub-station. McFee replied that will be addressed when the lease comes up for renewal later this year.
- THE VOTE (to refer police budgets to the budget committee): 8 - 0 in favour.
7:45 PM
The Mayor's Forum
- Mayor Scarrow detailed his attendance at a minimum of eight Christmas dinners/parties last month. Turnips, he learned at the Daily Bread Food Bank and City Hall, were not favoured by either Food Bank patrons or City Hall staff. An immediate poll of councillors showed a majority like turnips (6 - 2). A benefit for Blair Morgan on January 24 was highlighted.
Inquiries about Recycling, Tardy Document Production, Boy Hit by Bus, and the Airport Master Plan
- Councillor Atkinson asked when certain unserved areas on the East Hill will get recycling bins. He also asked if he could get the 2008 soccer committee minutes within a week, rather than go through the 8-month wait he endured before the 2007 minutes for this committee were forwarded to him.
- Councillor Zurakowski [a teacher] asked about the schoolboy hit by a bus the other day. The Mayor answered that the school bus he got off had left the scene before the boy was hit by a car, the boy went home, his parents took him to the hospital, he was kept overnight, and he was released the next day. Recognizing how slippery the streets are, the Mayor asked drivers to "please slow down," admitting that people had even seen him slide through an intersection last week. Councillor Zurakowski also asked that a letter be sent to NavCan about its intentions with respect to service changes at the aiport. The City Manager said that airport service reductions at 4 AM were possible.
Bylaw 38 (land for seniors condo parking - see above) Not Given Three Readings
- Councillor Atkinson and Councillor Williams were opposed to giving this bylaw third reading at this meeting, so it did not happen. [Mayor Scarrow originally overlooked the need for a motion asking leave to give the bylaw three readings at this meeting. The City Clerk informed him of this oversight.]
- THE VOTE (on first and second reading): 6 - 2, Atkinson and Williams opposed.
Notice of Motions to Name Ball Fields and Protect the Golf Course from Disappearing Ad Infinitum
- Councillor Zurakowski will move, at the January 26 meeting, that three Prime Ministers' Park ball fields be re-named after Prime Ministers Mackenzie King, Wilfrid Laurier, and John Diefenbaker.
- Mayor Scarrow will move, also at the January 26 meeting, that the municipal golf course be preserved and protected "in perpetuity."
Thanks for Doing Your Job
- Mayor Scarrow, after the adjournment motion, thanked the Herald, Rawlco Radio, and Shaw Cable personnel who attended the meeting.
END 8:06 PM
START - 7:01 PM
ABSENT - Councillor Dionne
PUBLIC GALLERY - Brian Clavier, Police Chief Dale McFee (after meeting started), Herald reporter Matthew Gauk (after 7:30)
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS - 137 pages
VENUE ALTERATION - Two loudspeakers now sit in the middle of the floor, facing council, just on the council side of the barrier that separates the public area from council's part of the room. These are connected to all microphones, so that council members can hear themselves and speakers at the podium more clearly.
Pecuniary Interest Form Submission Request
- For the ninth consecutive meeting, submission of these forms was requested by the Mayor. [Either some members of council still haven't submitted, and a simple request is insufficient, or no one has seen fit to remove this item from the agenda].
Bylaw 38 Public Hearing - Sale of Land to Allow More Parking Spaces at 658 River St. East Condo Project
- Brian Clavier spoke against the bylaw, based on parking not being a "public good," parking spaces (valuable land) being useless for any other purpose, the need for the city to give developers incentives to reduce parking spaces, the large amount of land already taken up by asphalt (especially in the downtown core), and potential interference with the Rotary Trail (currently on-street between 5th and 8th Avenue on River Street East).
- Councillor Zurakowski asked if the location of the Rotary Trail has been determined at this point on River Street. The Director said it will go on the sidewalk there (it's 5-feet wide).
- Councillor Atkinson noted this street is a snow route, there should be reduced parking requirements for this building (a seniors' complex), and the extra parking area may be detrimental for parking associated with the new Habitat for Humanity house on the corner of 4th and River Street.
- THE VOTE (to be considered in the bylaws portion of this meeting): 6 - 2 in favour(Councillors Atkinson and Williams opposed).
Extension of Art Hauser Ice Surface Season to Accommodate Sask. Uranium Mines Hockey Tournament on April 3-4, 2009
- Councillor Ring wanted to know how much the organizers were prepared to pay for this, and what related revenue the city would get from this tournament.
- Councillor Atkinson asked whether the 2007 financial statements for the Art Hasuer Centre were on the city web site. The administration reply was: these were seen by council, but sent back to finance for finalization; they will return to council, then be posted online.
- Councillor Swystun [member of Art Hauser Centre Board] recalled that the statements showed "underspending by thousands of dollars."
- Councillor Zurakowski supported Swystun's recollection.
- THE VOTE (to refer back to administration for a report on the cost of extending the ice surface season at all three indoor rinks): 8 - 0 in favour.
Youth Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes from December 3, 2008
- there weren't any minutes, since there was no quorum at that meeting.
Bylaw 47 - First Reading of Bylaw to Approve Rural Residential Development on Highway 2 West of Red Wing Terrace (RM of Buckland) and North Side of Highway 302 (RM of PA) on the East Edge of the City
- Councillor Swystun declared a conflict of interest on this item, and excused himself. [It was not clear which of the two developments were the concern for him.]
- THE VOTE (to refer to bylaws section of this meeting for further consideration): 7 - 0 in favour.
Police Service Operating Budget ($9.979 million, up 6.97%) and Capital Budget (total $518,525, up 27%)
- Background: the total Police Commission expenses budget for 2009 is $17,983, up 7.42%. The $20,000 Draganflyer mini-helicopter (see photo) is being held back as a "mid-year" purchase, as are "throw phones" for the SWAT team and holding cell renovations ($39,525 for these two items). The Pandila law office building is being purchased for police use - for $51,000 per year, over 20 years.
- Councillor Atkinson asked about the four new officers that Councillor Dionne had spoken of at an earlier meeting: was the province giving base funding only, or did this grant include auxiliary costs (computer, office space, uniform, etc.)? Chief McFee replied that auxiliary costs are included - meaning the city gets $90,000 per officer (though the Sask. Police Association, which he heads, is asking that this be increased to $100,000). Atkinson then asked about the staffing levels at the Police Service. McFee replied there are 83 sworn officers, 5 bylaw officers, and about 23 civilian support staff. Atkinson said Moose Jaw has a total of just 87 staff. McFee replied we should not be compared with Moose Jaw (due to vastly different workloads - for example, in 2007 there were 4 public intoxication arrests in Moose Jaw and 1900 in PA), but to Saskatoon and Regina. Police statistics to be released in a few weeks will show declines in crime in PA.
- Councillor Zurakowski asked if the current service directions were sustainable. McFee replied that the Board [Police Commission] looks for sustainable revenue sources, and will continue its "intelligence-based, proactive" direction.
- Councillor Ring asked if there is pay parity with other jurisdictions' police officers. McFee replied that more people now apply to PA from other police services than he has ever seen in the past.
- Mayor Scarrow moved that the reference to "Dragonfly" in the capital budget be changed to "video surveillance" [since the latter is what the Draganflyer DOES, it can still be purchased using the latter designation]. McFee said a "stealth cam" would be useful on the river bank, or on the bridge. [No reference was made to potential right-to-privacy or similar civil rights issues.]
- Councillor Atkinson asked, given the Pandila purchase, what will happen to the Central Avenue sub-station. McFee replied that will be addressed when the lease comes up for renewal later this year.
- THE VOTE (to refer police budgets to the budget committee): 8 - 0 in favour.
7:45 PM
The Mayor's Forum
- Mayor Scarrow detailed his attendance at a minimum of eight Christmas dinners/parties last month. Turnips, he learned at the Daily Bread Food Bank and City Hall, were not favoured by either Food Bank patrons or City Hall staff. An immediate poll of councillors showed a majority like turnips (6 - 2). A benefit for Blair Morgan on January 24 was highlighted.
Inquiries about Recycling, Tardy Document Production, Boy Hit by Bus, and the Airport Master Plan
- Councillor Atkinson asked when certain unserved areas on the East Hill will get recycling bins. He also asked if he could get the 2008 soccer committee minutes within a week, rather than go through the 8-month wait he endured before the 2007 minutes for this committee were forwarded to him.
- Councillor Zurakowski [a teacher] asked about the schoolboy hit by a bus the other day. The Mayor answered that the school bus he got off had left the scene before the boy was hit by a car, the boy went home, his parents took him to the hospital, he was kept overnight, and he was released the next day. Recognizing how slippery the streets are, the Mayor asked drivers to "please slow down," admitting that people had even seen him slide through an intersection last week. Councillor Zurakowski also asked that a letter be sent to NavCan about its intentions with respect to service changes at the aiport. The City Manager said that airport service reductions at 4 AM were possible.
Bylaw 38 (land for seniors condo parking - see above) Not Given Three Readings
- Councillor Atkinson and Councillor Williams were opposed to giving this bylaw third reading at this meeting, so it did not happen. [Mayor Scarrow originally overlooked the need for a motion asking leave to give the bylaw three readings at this meeting. The City Clerk informed him of this oversight.]
- THE VOTE (on first and second reading): 6 - 2, Atkinson and Williams opposed.
Notice of Motions to Name Ball Fields and Protect the Golf Course from Disappearing Ad Infinitum
- Councillor Zurakowski will move, at the January 26 meeting, that three Prime Ministers' Park ball fields be re-named after Prime Ministers Mackenzie King, Wilfrid Laurier, and John Diefenbaker.
- Mayor Scarrow will move, also at the January 26 meeting, that the municipal golf course be preserved and protected "in perpetuity."
Thanks for Doing Your Job
- Mayor Scarrow, after the adjournment motion, thanked the Herald, Rawlco Radio, and Shaw Cable personnel who attended the meeting.
END 8:06 PM
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Why Create This Blog? What's its Purpose?
The passage from democracy [rule by the people] to oligarchy [rule by a few] or plutocracy [rule by the wealthy] is as perceptible to citizens as a frog’s perception that he is being boiled alive as he sits in a pot of cold water that is slowly being heated to a boil. This is the fancy way of saying that too many cuts to the municipal democracy in Prince Albert have been administered to the body politic since I started attending city council meetings in 1999. [In 2006 I spoke at council about "the death of democracy by a thousand small cuts."]
Information Gaps
Changes in council procedure don’t make the news. The local paper, radio stations (only the three-license conglomerate actually sends a reporter to council meetings), and our TV sub-station (a video clip supplier to the station in Saskatoon, though it has also been awarded 15 minutes of face time during noon hour, Monday to Friday only) don’t report things like
· the reduction in the public’s speaking time limit from 10 to 5 minutes
· movement of the public forum segment from the start to the tail end of regular council meetings
· the reduction in regular council meetings from 24 per year to 20 since 2005
· the increase in “special” council meetings (held on short notice, so citizens rarely know about them, and media attendance is sporadic) from 2 in 2005 to 26 in 2008.
The print and broadcast media specialize in reporting “controversy” - for the simple reason that it’s more interesting. Violence helps, since every journalist worth her bytes heard the phrase “If it bleeds, it leads” at least fifty times at an industry prep school. Anger is almost as newsworthy. There’s also a print passion here for “feel good” stories, the kind that make us want to cuddle our kids and pets, go to church, donate to a charity, and just generally radiate pleasure at being part of the wonderfully warm and considerate human race. Stories that might offend an advertizer or a prominent public person are rare. Most disturbing to us freedom-of-information types, the concept of investigative journalism is viewed locally as an anachronism from 18th century France (where the press was originally referred to as “the fourth estate”) that, despite lack of use, inept educators have insisted should persist.
Space and time restrictions also prevent the newspaper and radio from covering city council in a way that would give meaningful information to the electorate. Shaw cable usually records the regular meetings of council, but they’ve missed more of them in the past three years than I have, and finding the on-air broadcasts has become difficult. The network TV stations and our public radio network show up for BIG news items (of the ultra-controversial or big money variety).
A citizen interested in knowing exactly what transpired at a council meeting is left with three options:
- watch the Shaw broadcast on channel 10 (if it can be found, and assuming they haven’t changed their cable service to SaskTel Max or satellite TV), a time-consuming enterprise,
- read the meeting minutes, which are limited to recording decisions and one-line descriptions of lengthy presentations (for example, my detailed proposal for a Green Plan for the city, presented over a five-month period, is described in meeting minutes as “Brian Clavier asked City Council to look at a proposed Green Plan for the City”); or
- get off the couch and attend the meeting in person.
When the traditional media do report a story, too much important information is left out (or was excised by editors). Here’s an excellent example, from last week.
A few days before the January 12 council meeting, the local newspaper published a story on councillors’ 2008 attendance, as shown in this scanned extract.
Never mind that the reporter can’t spell the word that begins the description of the table (and doesn’t know how to use a spell checker), look at the numbers hand-written to the right of the table: the total of all meetings was 88, and the Mayor and eight councillors should have been “assessed” on the basis of their attendance in relation this total.
The article should have contained a table that included and commented on this information:
Scarrow (Mayor) - 86/88, or 98%
Gervais (Ward 1) - 58/88, or 66%
Dionne (Ward 2) - 83/88, or 94%
Atkinson (Ward 3) - 76/88, or 86%
Williams (Ward 4) - 66/88, or 75%
Matheson (Ward 5) - 86/88, or 98%
Ring (Ward 6) - 85/88, or 97%
Swystun (Ward 7) - 79/88, or 90%
Zurakowski (Ward 8) - 85/88, or 97%.
The reporter also failed to note that the “official” attendance records for every member of city council fictionalize the truth (because a 1980 council resolution allows three absences, across an indeterminate number of meeting categories, before any deduction is made from the total number of meetings attended). If EVERY member of council benefitted from the 3-absence rule, as is likely, then the actual attendance for all of them should be at least 3.4% lower (3/88, although this depends on how many meetings were held in the allowable three weeks the councillor was absent). Furthermore, “special” meetings are called on short notice (48 hours is common). [These transact “regular” business, normally without the inconvenience of anyone in the public gallery.] So councillors’ attendance at these is bound to be lower if they have jobs where time off is difficult to arrange on short notice.
For the record, my council meeting attendance in 2008 was 17/20 regular meetings, or 85% . I don’t get paid to attend, so I don’t get the benefit of the 3-absence rule. I also attended three committee meetings and one special meeting.
Another example of an information gap that this blog hopes to fill is evident in the following e-mail, sent late at night on January 11 (the day before council reviewed the police budgets), to all members of council and four of the five members of the Police Commission. [I read the council meeting documents in advance, which is where e-mail like this one have their genesis.]
Please explain the following issues with respect to the 2009 police operating and capital budgets.
1. Why do the police operating and capital budgets get city council review and approval before the budgets of any of the other city departments or city-funded entities?
2. Is there an explanation for the error in the percentage increase in the police operating budget from 2008 to 2009 (other than a broken calculator - see page 89 of the January 12, 2009 council meeting documents, where $9,979,210 - $9,328,700 = $650,510; and $650,510 is 6.97% of $9,328,700 - NOT 6.52%)?
3. Does the police service really need a high-tech, remote control Dragonfly [sic] mini-helicopter to enforce laws and "lead parades"? (While the item is a marvelous invention by a Saskatoon-based company, as featured in the Star-Phoenix last week, the $20,000 cost is a lot of money for a sophisticated device whose use is neither explained nor justified - see page 103 of the January 12, 2009 council meeting documents.)
4. When did city council authorize the purchase of the "Pandila building", a 2009 expenditure of $51,000? (This is the law office at 15 - 15th Street West, we presume - see page 104 of the January 12, 2009 council meeting documents.)
Thanks,Brian
No one answered any of these four questions. As it turns out, the mathematical error I note in question 2 was passed on to council, and, at the council meeting, the Mayor changed the mini-copter reference to “video surveillance” - a change which would allow the Draganflyer to be purchased without naming it (in fact, this technology is designed to perform video surveillance). The building purchase referred to in item 4 was apparently approved at a special meeting of council in late 2008, but the meeting minutes on the city web site currently (as of January 13, 2009) show nothing after November 24, and this item would certainly not be “public knowledge” until the police capital budget was included in the January 12 meeting documents (posted January 8 online).
The police budgets were actually the precise reason for the presence of two-thirds of all the people in the public gallery at the January 12 council meeting. [In addition to me, the Police Chief and the newspaper’s crime reporter showed up after the meeting had started.]
To my knowledge, the only independent commentary on city council that is divorced from the media or the official minutes is Councillor Atkinson’s blog, titled “The View from Ward Three.” His blog is a personal assessment of civic issues he deems important and how council has responded to those issues, with large doses of reflection and personal news. Readers of his blog and this one will quickly see the vast differences between the two.
Obviously, the purpose of my blog is to fill an information gap - one that has grown wider in the past three years. This is especially important in 2009, a municipal election year. Even though a clear majority (59%) of the municipal electorate voted for “none of the above” in 2006 (by staying away from the polls), they still might be curious abut what goes on at city council. This blog is for all the city’s residents, who deserve to have access to more information than is currently available to them. It is my hope that it will be particularly valuable to everyone who votes in the municipal election in October 2009. [And no, I haven’t decided if I’m running.]
What Goes on Here?
Within 48 hours after a council meeting, I will post a log for the meeting. I will try to keep my comments simple. I will neither lie to nor mislead my readers; I will sometimes be guilty of excessive candour. I will even try to ensure that these entries are unbiased (although I am not about to sully my reputation as an iconoclast). Unfortunately, I cannot promise brevity.
I will note the mundane - times of events, absences, pages of meeting documents, the public gallery size, and venue modifications. Jokes and other “asides” will usually be included here. Discussions on agenda items will be summarized, except for noteworthy comments. When votes are not unanimous, I will tell you who voted which way.
Occasionally I’ll need to vent on a topic that has little or nothing to do with municipal politics in Prince Albert. These will be titled “Off the Rails” posts.
Comments on blog posts are invited. Unlike many blogs, anyone can comment on this one without registering or identifying themselves. In return for this license, however, I will be monitoring and moderating all comments. I believe in free speech - even if it’s from people who can’t read carefully, write clearly, think logically, or be civil - but illogical attacks on my text that are loaded with obscenities will not see the light of cyberspace.
The passage from democracy [rule by the people] to oligarchy [rule by a few] or plutocracy [rule by the wealthy] is as perceptible to citizens as a frog’s perception that he is being boiled alive as he sits in a pot of cold water that is slowly being heated to a boil. This is the fancy way of saying that too many cuts to the municipal democracy in Prince Albert have been administered to the body politic since I started attending city council meetings in 1999. [In 2006 I spoke at council about "the death of democracy by a thousand small cuts."]
Information Gaps
Changes in council procedure don’t make the news. The local paper, radio stations (only the three-license conglomerate actually sends a reporter to council meetings), and our TV sub-station (a video clip supplier to the station in Saskatoon, though it has also been awarded 15 minutes of face time during noon hour, Monday to Friday only) don’t report things like
· the reduction in the public’s speaking time limit from 10 to 5 minutes
· movement of the public forum segment from the start to the tail end of regular council meetings
· the reduction in regular council meetings from 24 per year to 20 since 2005
· the increase in “special” council meetings (held on short notice, so citizens rarely know about them, and media attendance is sporadic) from 2 in 2005 to 26 in 2008.
The print and broadcast media specialize in reporting “controversy” - for the simple reason that it’s more interesting. Violence helps, since every journalist worth her bytes heard the phrase “If it bleeds, it leads” at least fifty times at an industry prep school. Anger is almost as newsworthy. There’s also a print passion here for “feel good” stories, the kind that make us want to cuddle our kids and pets, go to church, donate to a charity, and just generally radiate pleasure at being part of the wonderfully warm and considerate human race. Stories that might offend an advertizer or a prominent public person are rare. Most disturbing to us freedom-of-information types, the concept of investigative journalism is viewed locally as an anachronism from 18th century France (where the press was originally referred to as “the fourth estate”) that, despite lack of use, inept educators have insisted should persist.
Space and time restrictions also prevent the newspaper and radio from covering city council in a way that would give meaningful information to the electorate. Shaw cable usually records the regular meetings of council, but they’ve missed more of them in the past three years than I have, and finding the on-air broadcasts has become difficult. The network TV stations and our public radio network show up for BIG news items (of the ultra-controversial or big money variety).
A citizen interested in knowing exactly what transpired at a council meeting is left with three options:
- watch the Shaw broadcast on channel 10 (if it can be found, and assuming they haven’t changed their cable service to SaskTel Max or satellite TV), a time-consuming enterprise,
- read the meeting minutes, which are limited to recording decisions and one-line descriptions of lengthy presentations (for example, my detailed proposal for a Green Plan for the city, presented over a five-month period, is described in meeting minutes as “Brian Clavier asked City Council to look at a proposed Green Plan for the City”); or
- get off the couch and attend the meeting in person.
When the traditional media do report a story, too much important information is left out (or was excised by editors). Here’s an excellent example, from last week.
A few days before the January 12 council meeting, the local newspaper published a story on councillors’ 2008 attendance, as shown in this scanned extract.
Never mind that the reporter can’t spell the word that begins the description of the table (and doesn’t know how to use a spell checker), look at the numbers hand-written to the right of the table: the total of all meetings was 88, and the Mayor and eight councillors should have been “assessed” on the basis of their attendance in relation this total.
The article should have contained a table that included and commented on this information:
Scarrow (Mayor) - 86/88, or 98%
Gervais (Ward 1) - 58/88, or 66%
Dionne (Ward 2) - 83/88, or 94%
Atkinson (Ward 3) - 76/88, or 86%
Williams (Ward 4) - 66/88, or 75%
Matheson (Ward 5) - 86/88, or 98%
Ring (Ward 6) - 85/88, or 97%
Swystun (Ward 7) - 79/88, or 90%
Zurakowski (Ward 8) - 85/88, or 97%.
The reporter also failed to note that the “official” attendance records for every member of city council fictionalize the truth (because a 1980 council resolution allows three absences, across an indeterminate number of meeting categories, before any deduction is made from the total number of meetings attended). If EVERY member of council benefitted from the 3-absence rule, as is likely, then the actual attendance for all of them should be at least 3.4% lower (3/88, although this depends on how many meetings were held in the allowable three weeks the councillor was absent). Furthermore, “special” meetings are called on short notice (48 hours is common). [These transact “regular” business, normally without the inconvenience of anyone in the public gallery.] So councillors’ attendance at these is bound to be lower if they have jobs where time off is difficult to arrange on short notice.
For the record, my council meeting attendance in 2008 was 17/20 regular meetings, or 85% . I don’t get paid to attend, so I don’t get the benefit of the 3-absence rule. I also attended three committee meetings and one special meeting.
Another example of an information gap that this blog hopes to fill is evident in the following e-mail, sent late at night on January 11 (the day before council reviewed the police budgets), to all members of council and four of the five members of the Police Commission. [I read the council meeting documents in advance, which is where e-mail like this one have their genesis.]
Please explain the following issues with respect to the 2009 police operating and capital budgets.
1. Why do the police operating and capital budgets get city council review and approval before the budgets of any of the other city departments or city-funded entities?
2. Is there an explanation for the error in the percentage increase in the police operating budget from 2008 to 2009 (other than a broken calculator - see page 89 of the January 12, 2009 council meeting documents, where $9,979,210 - $9,328,700 = $650,510; and $650,510 is 6.97% of $9,328,700 - NOT 6.52%)?
3. Does the police service really need a high-tech, remote control Dragonfly [sic] mini-helicopter to enforce laws and "lead parades"? (While the item is a marvelous invention by a Saskatoon-based company, as featured in the Star-Phoenix last week, the $20,000 cost is a lot of money for a sophisticated device whose use is neither explained nor justified - see page 103 of the January 12, 2009 council meeting documents.)
4. When did city council authorize the purchase of the "Pandila building", a 2009 expenditure of $51,000? (This is the law office at 15 - 15th Street West, we presume - see page 104 of the January 12, 2009 council meeting documents.)
Thanks,Brian
No one answered any of these four questions. As it turns out, the mathematical error I note in question 2 was passed on to council, and, at the council meeting, the Mayor changed the mini-copter reference to “video surveillance” - a change which would allow the Draganflyer to be purchased without naming it (in fact, this technology is designed to perform video surveillance). The building purchase referred to in item 4 was apparently approved at a special meeting of council in late 2008, but the meeting minutes on the city web site currently (as of January 13, 2009) show nothing after November 24, and this item would certainly not be “public knowledge” until the police capital budget was included in the January 12 meeting documents (posted January 8 online).
The police budgets were actually the precise reason for the presence of two-thirds of all the people in the public gallery at the January 12 council meeting. [In addition to me, the Police Chief and the newspaper’s crime reporter showed up after the meeting had started.]
To my knowledge, the only independent commentary on city council that is divorced from the media or the official minutes is Councillor Atkinson’s blog, titled “The View from Ward Three.” His blog is a personal assessment of civic issues he deems important and how council has responded to those issues, with large doses of reflection and personal news. Readers of his blog and this one will quickly see the vast differences between the two.
Obviously, the purpose of my blog is to fill an information gap - one that has grown wider in the past three years. This is especially important in 2009, a municipal election year. Even though a clear majority (59%) of the municipal electorate voted for “none of the above” in 2006 (by staying away from the polls), they still might be curious abut what goes on at city council. This blog is for all the city’s residents, who deserve to have access to more information than is currently available to them. It is my hope that it will be particularly valuable to everyone who votes in the municipal election in October 2009. [And no, I haven’t decided if I’m running.]
What Goes on Here?
Within 48 hours after a council meeting, I will post a log for the meeting. I will try to keep my comments simple. I will neither lie to nor mislead my readers; I will sometimes be guilty of excessive candour. I will even try to ensure that these entries are unbiased (although I am not about to sully my reputation as an iconoclast). Unfortunately, I cannot promise brevity.
I will note the mundane - times of events, absences, pages of meeting documents, the public gallery size, and venue modifications. Jokes and other “asides” will usually be included here. Discussions on agenda items will be summarized, except for noteworthy comments. When votes are not unanimous, I will tell you who voted which way.
Occasionally I’ll need to vent on a topic that has little or nothing to do with municipal politics in Prince Albert. These will be titled “Off the Rails” posts.
Comments on blog posts are invited. Unlike many blogs, anyone can comment on this one without registering or identifying themselves. In return for this license, however, I will be monitoring and moderating all comments. I believe in free speech - even if it’s from people who can’t read carefully, write clearly, think logically, or be civil - but illogical attacks on my text that are loaded with obscenities will not see the light of cyberspace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
