Hinesight – January 2010
I attended the recent meeting of the LWF Ratepayers Association, as I have for many years with the exception of last year when Sandra Carr was elected Chair. I watched as Sandra and the Executive turned the corner on accountability and developed a new set of bylaws that would make the association more transparent and accountable for the money raised from an Area Rate on property tax, something that was not apparent at any Ratepayers meeting that I had attended in my time as a resident of Fall River.
As a resident paying the tax, I had attempted to determine some accountability for the spending, but was denied accountability when I asked. On more than one occasion I had asked for Line Item spending in each budget category. True accountability was replaced by a Treasurer’s Report that vaguely presented a budget with several general categories of spending. I was denied, as was everyone else, a breakdown of spending. The reason given was that HRM pays the bills submitted, from the money collected from you the taxpayer so no breakdown was available.
With the exception of this latest meeting, the meetings were so poorly attended that a quorum was often reached by calling in friends and relatives of the Executive Board. Therefore, accountability was not forthcoming. I thought we were on the road to responsible governance of our money with a motion putting forward a new set of bylaws with amendments – a motion to adopt the new bylaws and have them forwarded for ratification by Joint Stocks and HRM. The amendment called for the new bylaws to be implemented by the ratification by HRM and the new Executive, however, when the motion passed, the presiding president was basically stripped of her duties and disqualified from serving because she does not presently live in the LWF area. The new Executive was to develop a policy to recognize ex-patriots; instead, our president was given the boot by a bylaw change that was not ratified.
My concern is not only that we lost the accountability of a good president, but she was replaced by the individual she was asking for accountability, and a slate of officers loyal to the new Chair .The Board of Directors was also elected, and some are employed by LWF programs funded by the taxpayers dollars over which they preside as Board Members – a conflict of interest in any other organization.
An even greater concern is the lack of concern amongst the families paying the taxes, who neither ask questions or attend the meeting once a year where votes on the budget and tax rate take place.
My third concern is that with the exception of our councilor, who was in attendance, our MLA and Member of Parliament were once again absent when the money was being discussed. Does anyone care?
Well said Gary
People do need to ask questionsThey would likley be amazed and appalled if they did.
Gary
1. The annual meeting of LWF and the taxes funneled through the association by HRM are not provincial nor federal issues. There is therefore no obligation or requirement for either the MP or MLA to attend such a meeting, although it wouldn’t be a bad idea for the optics if nothing else. However my understanding is that the meeting was held on a Sunday and in my opinion politicians should be given a pass at least one day per week. Sunday has traditionally been that day.
2. The Councillor for the area, Barry Dalrymple, did attend the meeting. There is apparently an accountability issue in regards as to how the area rate which is set by the LWF Ratepayers but approved by HRM council is spent. It seems logical that the councillor for the area should have no difficulty finding out how the LWF money was previously spent before the new area rate is approved by council. If the councillor for the area is being stonewalled by the board of the WJCC then he should take it up with HRM staff. If HRM staff is stonewalling the councillor for the area there is a bigger problem than how the WJCC board spends the ratepayers’ money.
3. Unfortunately you cannot force people to attend community meetings any more than you can force them to vote. People who do neither risk paying the price both in actual tax dollars out of their pockets and in risking getting less than ideal representation for their communities even on volunteer boards. Many people would rather spend the day watching football or playing with their kids than going to a disfunctional community meeting filled with not so subtle bullying tactics. It is not hard to be sympathetic to their choice.
4. Volunteers continue to be the backbone of our communities. We could not function without them and it is always risky to criticize volunteers. However volunteers nevertheless have a responsibility to give open and transparent information to the people to whom they are serving, particularly where money is involved. Sandra Carr is and has been a valued community volunteer for several years and it is unfortunate to read how she was the victim of what appears to be underhanded and calculated small town politics.
Steve, Seemingly our MP Peter Stoffer and MLA Percy Paris are from the same school of thought as you; that being ,no sharing of jurisdictional powers. I guess that is the reason our councillor is usually the only one to show up for conversation regarding funding discussion and capital spending projects. I would suggest if there was a presentation or some gladhanding to do they would both be there and Stoffer would be there to present a Sheila Copps Canadian flag on behalf of some Federal Minister without ministerial consent , something he does very well ,and yes that is part of politics too.
Steve have you ever had in depth dealings with HRM or tried to determine how they operate. Believe me it aint easy.
Gary
As a result of the type of work I do my interaction with staff at HRM is all too frequent. They have done their best to drive development out of our county to neighbouring counties due to the endless stream of regulations and policies being developed for no particular reason but to justify their pay and to try to keep busy. This has been exacerbated by the high taxes we continue to pay in HRM despite the reduced service level being provided.
I thought that one of the roles of council is to approve policy and procedures. Any councillor should insist on a policy that no area rates could be struck in any area by a handful of homeowners without the approval of council or community council, whatever the case may be.
Having been elected to serve our area on the School Board many many years ago I am familiar with how unelected board staff often had an agenda much different from the board members and the residents. I suspect that this is often the case at HRM council as well. Staff can manipulate things and they have an unlimited time frame to accomplish their goals.
Regardless of how difficult it is to deal with staff I would be surprised to learn that LWF and by association WJCC could have their budgets and funding go through council without some sort of approval by the councillor. A wise experienced politician once said that nobody gives you power, you have to take it.