LWF AGM Stirs Emotions and Leaves Ratepayers Divided
Fall River (D2N) – The Dec. 6/09 Annual General Meeting of the LWF Ratepayers Association has reportedly stirred up emotions and created a rift among a number of community residents, including two well-know community volunteers. Many people are expressing concern over the events of the meeting and a number of questions have been raised about bylaws, as well as about the rules and regulations as they would apply to Ratepayer Boards and the groups or programs that benefit from Area Rate funding. People are asking why the new bylaws approved at the Dec. 6 meeting seemingly apply to one non-ratepayer, but possibly not to others.
In a Dec. 19 interview with Councillor Barry Dalrymple, who was at the Dec. 6, LWF Annual General Meeting, he acknowledged was aware of the controversy surrounding that meeting. “I have had many, many complaints sent to me about that meeting,” he said. “There certainly have been questions that have been asked I can’t answer yet.” The Councillor said he is scheduled to meet with people from the HRM’s Legal Department and the HRM’s Community Development Department sometime in January, to discuss the situation and to find a resolution to the matter. He declined to comment any further on the situation until after the January meeting, explaining anything more “would be conjuncture at this point” and he did not want to get into that.
Sandra Carr, a life-long resident of Fall River, was invited to sit as Chair of the LWF Ratepayers Association Board in 2008. Carr was already a member of the LWF Ratepayers Association Board Executive, having held the position of Board Secretary for three years prior. “Sandra and I had spoken about the vacant Chair position,” explained Windsor Jct. resident Cheryl Newcombe, who was the LWFRA Board Treasurer at that time. “And she had agreed to accept the nomination as Chair. I did nominate her in her absence, but not without her knowing,” Carr was voted in as Chair of the LWF Ratepayer Board in “absentia” during 2008’s LWF AGM. Both Carr and Newcombe have held, and continue to hold, positions on a number of community Boards.
Many people, including Carr herself, say she was pushing for better transparency and accountability of the Area Rate Taxes collected and allotted through the LWF Ratepayers Association. When asked, Carr explained – as Chair of the Board, part of her responsibility was to be accountable for the Area Rate Tax dollars collected. Carr says she simply wanted to be able to provide LWF Area Ratepayers with a breakdown of where every dollar of their tax money goes. The money collected through the 3 cent per $100 Area Rate is designated to the Windsor Junction Community Centre (WJCC). A small amount goes to Lakeview (Park) Payroll, and a small part goes to the LWF Baseball Payroll. The WJCC has a summer program for children from the LWF area. For a very minimal fee, kids from the LWF Ratepayer area can attend each day during the summer months if they like; they can take in swimming lessons and they can play games and do crafts, all under the watchful eyes of trained staff members. Lifeguards who are employed by the WJCC are said to be well qualified for their positions. Cheryl Newcombe, who sits as the head of the WJCC Board, and who is the new Chair of the LWF Ratepayer Association Board, oversees the operation of the WJCC Program.
Carr had lived in the LWF Ratepayer Area for nearly fifty years, and she had been a member of the LWF Ratepayers Association during those years. Although she was no longer technically fit the criteria to be a member of the LWF Ratepayers Association after she moved to live with her daughter in St. Andrews Village, according to Carr that had not ever been a problem, and she had remained on the LWF Board for five years, up until the Dec. 6/09 meeting.
“It wouldn’t be appropriate to discuss the details of the meeting or how other people perceived the meeting,” said Carr. “However, as a lifelong resident of the Fall River area, I have served my community in many capacities. While living on Blue Hill Road, I became Secretary of the LWF Ratepayers Association and remained in that role for several years; this, in spite of the fact that I reported my move to St. Andrews Drive. Board members assured me that my address was not a problem as I was grandfathered in because of having lived in the area most of my life,” she added. “Last year, I was nominated and elected (in absentia) as Chair of LWF Ratepayers, with the clear knowledge of all involved that I currently reside in part of LARA (Lockview Area).”
Carr held the Chair position on the Executive of the LWF Ratepayer Board; Vice-Chair was Buddy Baker; Secretary, Annika Renborg, and Board Treasurer was Cheryl Newcombe. The original bylaws for the LWF Ratepayers Association were taken from the Registry of Joint Stocks. From the Ratepayer Board, a committee was created and they held a series of meetings to make changes to the new bylaws in order to make them fit properly for the LWF Ratepayers Association. “All of the bylaws that were put in place were done so by a committee of people, never by an individual, and were done in the hopes of creating a more accountable and structured organization to benefit our communities,” Carr said.
The LWF Ratepayer Board Executive reviewed a plan for an umbrella group, which was seen as being the possible beginning of a co-operative in the area, one that would bring many groups together under one. An invitation to LWF Ratepayers was extended via the LWF Ratepayers Newsletter, which went out in the mail. Folks who were interested in joining the umbrella group were invited to come to the Dec. 6 meeting if they wished. Two members of the Fall River Crime Prevention Association attended; former Councillor Krista Snow was one of them. There were also a number of other newcomers who attended the meeting, including one resident from the Schwartzwald Subdivision, who was confirmed as an LWF Ratepayer member.
The amended bylaws were taken to the Dec. 6 AGM with 100% agreement from the Executive, and 100% agreement of the Board. “We all agreed that these bylaws would be the right fit for the future of the LWF Ratepayers Association,” said Newcombe.
The new bylaws were passed at the meeting with a one-word change in one of the definitions. Under Membership Rights and Responsibilities, the old bylaws stated that a person living in the geographic area of Lakeview, Windsor Jct, and Fall River and/or those who pay the area rate, are LWF Ratepayer members. The new bylaws have dropped the or and now read only and. This one word change, from and/or to and, sparked controversy among Ratepayers (and non-ratepayers) who were in attendance at the Dec. 6 meeting.
The LWF Ratepayer Meetings have a long history of casualness concerning who can and who cannot participate in the Ratepayer Meetings. Fall River resident Gary Hines was present at the Dec. 6 LWFRA meeting. “I don’t recall it ever being asked at a meeting if you did or did not own property and have the right to vote before a vote took place,” said Hines. “From way back, since years ago, it seems like I recall the rules were made up as they went along. That is how it was for decades. Whoever was at the table, at the meeting, everyone voted because they needed a quorum. You can go back and look at lists of officers who served but who were not property owners. Boundaries have always been vague and voting patterns have been vague concerning who was allowed to vote or hold office on the LWF Ratepayer Board.” It is a claim echoed by many longtime area residents. “That was how this meeting (Dec. 6) was also being conducted,” said Hines, “at least in the beginning.”
According to a number of people who were at the meeting, the start of the Dec. 6 meeting seemed to be no different than any other LWF Board meeting that had ever been held. The meeting went forward without any guidelines in place for voting and without confirming who was an LWF Ratepayer and who was not. According to Newcombe, an announcement was made asking persons who were not LWF Ratepayer members to refrain from voting, however no official identification system was used to ensure that only LWF Ratepayers actually did vote – it was left up to the honour system, as it had been done every year prior at LWF Ratepayers Meetings.
“There was no official confirmation done at the meeting of who was or who was not technically an LWF Ratepayer,” Hines said, “not for the nomination process, and not for the vote. The only time technicalities came into it, was when Sandra was told she no longer qualified to be on the Board under the new bylaws.”
Based upon the information provided by many people who were at the meeting, there was a lot of confusion; and based upon the accounts of many people at the meeting, it appears the minutes of that meeting are missing a great deal of information, including any details of the discussion on the bylaws and grandfathering, which is reported to have allegedly taken up to three quarters of the meeting time.
According to what is available in the minutes, this is what took place: the new bylaws were presented and comments and corrections were called for. Amy Vey pointed out that item 6e, in the bylaws, reading and/or needed to be corrected to and. Gary Hines moved that the bylaws be accepted as corrected in item 6, a motion that was seconded by Paul Dalrymple. Councillor Barry Dalrymple confirmed he voted against the motion, adding ” a number of other people at the meeting voted against the meeting as well.”
Chair Sandra Carr called the Dec.6 meeting to order with approximately fifty people in attendance. The Agenda was approved, and the minutes from the previous years AGM were read and approved with corrections noted. Carr provided information on last summers Keloose; the records were available for review on a side table, including all financial information. Carr gave her Chairs report. The new bylaws were passed.
A discussion on creating a grandfather clause began after the new bylaws were passed. The matter of grandfathering goes way back, according to Newcombe. “The Windsor Junction Community Centre had adopted a policy many years before that said that if you had grown up in the area and you still had family ties in the area, that you could maintain your membership in the WJCC,” said Newcombe. Carr technically fit the criteria for a member of the WJCC and as a member served on the Board of the LWFRA as a member with this definition for a number of years.
According to Newcombe, during the meeting, Krista Snow stated she fit the same profile that Sandra Carr fit, and she wanted to be involved in the Umbrella Group. Like Carr, Snow does not reside within the LWF Ratepayer boundaries; she has lived on Brook St. in Fletcher’s Lake for a number of years. Snow was born and raised in the LWF Ratepayer area, and her parents were members of the LWFRA.
Snow explained what prompted her to attend the meeting, “I was invited while at the recent COP (Citizens on Patrol) meeting,” said Snow. “I was also informed by a resident of Lockview Road that the funding may change, and that the WJCC Area Rate monies may be moved to different areas throughout Fall River. This is not allowed, see HRM guidelines. I was also asked by my mother if I would give her a ride. Until just recently, I have been a Ratepayer in the LWF for years.”
There are unconfirmed reports of allegations circulating, implying that cuts or changes to the WJCC Area Rate monies were intended. It is something Carr denies.
“Any requests that were made were never done to eliminate programs that exist in our communities, or to put into question the funding of these programs. In fact the exact opposite is true,” said Carr. “All that we were trying to achieve was a transparent accounting, to ensure that the funds available to our communities would support our present and future programs in the best way possible. At the end of the day, what is important is our ability to provide our communities the best and most diverse selection of programs that are possible through the funding that is available to us.” Carr expressed support for the youth who are employed by the WJCC summer program, saying she believes they do an outstanding job with the children who attend the summer program of the WJCC.
LWF Ratepayer membership has grown significantly since the Area Rate was implemented so many years ago, and as the population of the LWF Ratepayer membership has grown, so too have the Area Rate Tax dollars collected through the Area Rate Tax, Carr explained. She maintains her goal was simply to ensure complete and transparent accountability of records showing where the Area Rate Tax dollars were spent, explaining if she was to be part of the group responsible for Ratepayers Tax dollars, she wanted to do the job right, including being able to account to Ratepayers for where those dollars were being used.
Newcombe says Snow’s request during the Dec. 6 meeting, to be included, set off a debate among many people at the meeting. “Krista’s question started a flurry of comments, some for and some against, having a grandfather clause,“ said Newcombe, adding that someone from Lakeview, said (something like) “how can we allow grandfathering to people who will be able to vote on our tax rate, when they don’t even pay the tax!”
That changed the mood in the room,” Newcombe said. “It was obvious we needed to take more time to consider the role and the policies for this new corporation, with these new bylaws.”
“Barry Dalrymple made an amendment to the bylaw motion that said the new Board would bring forward a set of policies to a Public Special meeting with all the proper notices for everybody, just like an annual meeting, and include clarification on the grandfathering clause”, said Newcombe. The motion was passed as amended.
The minutes available record that the formation of an umbrella organization was opened for discussion, however Newcombe moved that the discussion be postponed until the grandfathering policy was defined. According to both Newcombe and the minutes, the move was seconded by Councillor Barry Dalrymple.
The meeting moved forward. The Windsor Junction Community Centre (WJCC) report was presented by WJCC Board member Linsey Hope. The WJCC Financial Report was presented by Cheryl Newcombe. Community member Greg Boyd moved that the operations report for 2008/2009 be accepted, it was seconded by Patti Snow of Fall River. Newcombe moved that the budget for 2010/2011 be accepted; it was seconded by Wayne Marchand.
During the meeting, Snow pointed out that under the new bylaws which had been passed, Sandra Carr no longer qualified to sit as Chair of the LWF Ratepayer Board as she did not fit the new criteria. It was an observation that allegedly did not sit well with some people at the meeting; according to witnesses, a few people stormed out.
“Sandra Carr is a great community volunteer, it was terrible. She was basically kicked off the Board,” said Fall River Ratepayer Paul Dalrymple. “Why? In my opinion, the entire meeting was basically a joke. Sandra was doing a great job; there was no problem with her holding a seat on the Board before, so why is it a problem all of a sudden? All she was trying to do was to make the LWF Ratepayer Board and the groups it looks after, totally transparent regarding the Area Rate Tax money. What was wrong with that? She can’t sit on the Board now because she’s not technically a Ratepayer?”
Other people who were at the Dec. 6 meeting have voiced concern over unconfirmed reports that one or more of the people elected to the new Board may not technically fit the criteria of the new bylaws to be a member of the LWF Ratepayers Association either, because they may not own property within the LWF Area Rate boundaries. It is the same technicality and reason that Carr was not able to remain as Chair of the LWFRA Board.
In an interview, Snow explained it was the new bylaws that forced Carr to resign from the Board. “The fact is, the Board accepted the bylaw that disallowed a non-ratepayer to sit on the Board. Period,” she said. “This is not my opinion, this is fact. Anyone who can read and did read the bylaws are vocal with their agreement with my statement. Also needs to be restated that I mentioned the bylaw before the vote, giving obvious ample opportunity for the Board to change it.”
Snow suggested asking Hines why he would move acceptance of new bylaws that would cut Sandra Carr from the Board. “He and everyone else in the room where given the opportunity to make changes before the motion was put on the floor,” said Snow. “That to me was the most curious thing that happened at the meeting. People should take the time to listen to others comments.”
Hines offered this explanation, “I moved to accept the new bylaws because I believed they were doing it in good faith, and in having accountability by doing so,” he said, in response to Snows question. “I moved the motion looking forward to putting in accountability. We never got it. Instead it was turned around and used to force Sandra out.”
During the Dec. 6 meeting, a discussion around the definition of membership began. “It had become pretty specific in the new bylaws,” said Newcombe. “The new bylaws explicitly said that you had to be a member to hold office, and that you had to be a member to vote.”
When the vote was taken on the bylaws and the new bylaws were officially passed, “This meant that Sandra could no longer be on the Board,” explained Newcombe.
Under Membership Rights and Privileges, the new bylaws state that to be considered a member of the LWF Ratepayer Association a person must: reside in the geographic area of Lakeview, Windsor Jct. and Fall River and they must also pay the Area Rate Tax on their property. Once the new bylaws were passed, only people who live in the LWF area and pay the Area Rate technically qualified to sit on the new Board.
A debate ensued, with people arguing for and against Carr’s right to serve on the LWF Board. The arguing continued for a short time, until Carr stood up and resigned as Chair of the LWF Ratepayer Board. When interviewed and asked, Carr explained that she cared too much about the overall good of the community to sit by and watch the meeting be reduced to no more than a circus, so she stepped down.
Carr’s disqualification to sit as Chair of the LWF Board has left people asking questions. “Why in the past were non-property owners allowed to vote at the meetings and to hold office, but now, under the new bylaws that got voted in at the meeting, you could still apparently nominate someone or vote if you were a non-property owner, but Sandra could not sit as Chair of the Board.” said Hines. “I guess my question would be “Why did the new bylaws apply to one non-ratepayer, but not to other non-ratepayers at the meeting?”
The 3cent per $100 Area Rate was implemented twenty or thirty years ago to support the Windsor Jct. Community Centre Program. Carr says as part of her efforts to move the LWFRA forward with better accountability to Ratepayers, she had requested a breakdown of the Line Items in the budget for the WJCC Program. Newcombe maintains the records Carr was requesting are in the hands of the HRM Financial Department.
“The financial reports were presented at each meeting,” said Newcombe. “Those books are kept by the HRM Finance Department. They keep the money, they pay the bills. I merely reproduce the numbers from them in a format that is easier to read.”
Newcombe cites the Privacy Act as the reason she cannot provide a detailed breakdown of the WJCC Payroll. “As an employer, I cannot release personal information about employees, and that includes information about their salary,” she said in a telephone interview. “It is against the law.”
“Traditionally, financial statements have come forward that have not provided breakdowns of the different Line Items,” Hines explained. “For example, who got the checks for lawn mowing, or putting floors in the buildings, etc. Boards need to present records to the Association of expenditures, not just Line Items. If you spend this much on lawn mowing, who did the job, who got paid, or was a lawn mower purchased, those sort of breakdowns for instance. Those are the breakdowns that need to be shown and available. They need to be presented so there is complete transparency of where funds are spent. Although the HRM gives a record noting Line Items, there is no requirement for local accountability. The new bylaws were supposed to establish more accountability for the funding. These new bylaws were supposed to protect taxpayers. Sandra Carr was trying to move the LWFR Association towards better accountability for the tax dollars the LWFRA Board oversees.”
After Carr’s resignation, according to the minutes, Greg Boyd stepped in and took over as Nomination Chair for the vote to elect a new Board.
According to Newcombe, she then resigned as Board Treasurer. “I announced I would not re-offer for the Treasurer’s job because I had lost the support of the Executive,” said Newcombe, who presented her Financial Report, despite resigning from her position. “Then the elections came,” explained Newcombe, “I was nominated as Chair and took the position.”
When the voting was over, a completely new Board Executive was in place.
The new Board members are as follows: Chair: Cheryl Newcombe (nominated by Linsey Hope, seconded by Wendy Pruneau); Vice-Chair: Sean McCool (nominated by Joanne Boudreau, Troy Bennett), elected by acclamation; Treasurer: Amy Vey (nominated by Linsey Hope, David Devlin) elected by acclamation; Secretary: Emily Clarke (nominated by Linsey Hope, Patti Snow) elected by acclamation.
Six Directors positions were filled: elected were Raeann Dwinell, Leo Meagher, Nick Phillips, Gary Geddess, Jeanette Smith, and Linsey Hope.
There are questions as to whether or not all of the new Board members are technically LWF Ratepayers. Although the answer remains to be seen, people are asking if the same technicalities that prevented Sandra Carr from remaining on the LWF Board as Chair, might also prevent other people on the new Board from holding a seat on the Board.
When asked, Newcombe explained there is no conflict with a person sitting on the LWFRA Board and also being employed by the WJCC Program. “We have always had the manager as a member at large,” she explained. “The manager has to know the Board and understand what the Board wants in order to do the work of the Board correctly.” There has been only one paid employee on the Board for the last couple of years according to Newcombe, the manager, and that person will not be returning to the WJCC this summer. “Emily Clarke will take over as senior manager this year,” said Newcombe, “but we do not hold meetings in the summer, so there is no conflict with our paid staff.” Clarke was voted onto the LWF Ratepayer Board as Secretary at the Dec. 6 meeting.
Finding official answers to questions or about the technicalities and the rules and regulations which may or may not apply, has proven to be difficult. Getting clarification from the Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM) about the rules and regulations on Ratepayer Boards, Bylaws, Privacy Laws, Area Rate Taxes, and about what is or is not considered a Conflict of Interest, has been very difficult, and a number of the questions asked regarding those matters remain unanswered.
The HRM Legal Department explained a bit about the expenditure of Area Rated Funds. “With respect to the expenditure of area rated funds, HRM adopted a Recreation Area Rate Policy in May 2002. That policy requires that an annual business plan and detailed budget be provided to HRM. That detailed budget can be found on the HRM website under the June 30th, 2009 agenda, item 11.1.5, Appendix D. It should be noted that the referenced budget would only address the area rated funds and not the entirety of the LWF budget.”
Following is the reply to questions directed to the Registry of Joint Stocks – this is the information provided to District 2 News by the Registry of Joint Stock Companies:
● The LWF Ratepayers Association is a not-for-profit group registered under the Societies Act.
● The Windsor Junction Community Centre is a Limited by Guarantee company formed under the Companies Act.
● A society’s Memorandum of Association states it purpose and often indicates the groups it intends to support.
● Societies that give money to any other not-for-profit organizations are free to attach any conditions to the gift as they may wish, including a requirement that they be provided with their financials. This is a contractual matter between the organizations and does not involve the Registry of Joint Stock Companies.
● Copies of the memorandum, articles and by-laws of companies and societies are public information and may be requested from the Registry of Joint Stock Companies or viewed at our offices at the 9th floor of the Maritime Centre, 1505 Barrington St., Halifax.
● The Registry requires societies to file financial information. Companies formed under the Companies Act are not required to do the same.
There are numerous suggestions, that because the AGM LWF Ratepayer Meeting held Dec. 6 was so confusing, it should be ruled “invalid”, and another meeting should be held in its place.
One Ratepayer summed up his thoughts about the Dec. 6 meeting with a bit of sarcastic humour, seemingly based upon Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s now infamous request of Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean to prorogue Parliament until March 3, (Harper came to power with “accountability” as one of his Top 5 priorities). “When that meeting began to get totally confusing and out of hand,” said the LWF Ratepayer, “Sandra Carr would have been better off if she had done like Canada’s Prime Minister,” he said, winking. “Instead of stepping down, she should have pulled a Harper…and prorogued the meeting!”
Unfortunately a lot of people do not attend these meetings and this article proves that maybe we should all get ourselves out there for them in the future. If this much confusion went on at this meeting which obviously affects our tax dollars that we are paying and what is being done with them, then maybe they should hold another meeting. This way we can all make sure that everyone that is on the board and voting is a tax paying residence of the LWF area. I also agree with having all expenditures listed out to see where each dollar is going.
Is this the same Cheryl Newcombe that The Coast mentions in it’s October 2009 article about secret Halifax Council meetings?
http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/archives/2009/10/29/council-sticks-to-secret-appointments
I as a tax payer feel that the L.W.F Rate Payers association should be Audited to show where all the money is being spent and where it is allocated. I find that the L.W.F is over budgeting for things that are being done instead of budgeting correctly and using the tax payers money more wisely.
I think the community should be more involved in the yearly meetings and more encouragement should be givin for us (the community) to get involved.
This is just one man’s opinion but i hope others will see this and agree.
In 1985 I was a member of the executive of what is now called the LWF Ratepayers Association. For over a year several members of the executive attempted to obtain information about the finances of the Windsor Junction Community Centre.
This was motivated by our request to have $1500 allocated from the LWF budget to help build a tot park on Lockview Road. We were advised by the “lifers” that there was no extra money and that all area rate funds were allocated to the WJCC. When we discovered that a ladies softball team was being funded by the LWF Ratepayers we were told that this was an “off campus” program supported by the WJCC. Paying for a small group of adults to play softball appeared an odd use of taxpayers funds and confirmed that not all funds were being spent at the WJCC as were had been told.
After being rebuffed in our efforts to have some of our tax dollars used to build a tot park on Lockview Road (at that time about $10,000 per year was being generated from Lockview Road area rateassessments) and frustrated in our efforts to obtain the information regarding the finances of the WJCC we decided something had to be done or we would never see any development in the community outside of the WJCC. With the support of former councillor Gordie Snow several community members formed an association in 1986 which was entiled the Lockview Area Residents Association (LARA). The association’s first chair was Michael Creighton, who remains an active volunteer in our community today.
Upon forming the association, Lockview Area residents have not had to pay an area rate. LARA”s funds came from first the former Halifax County’s and now HRM’s general tax budgets. Since that time the funds have been used to build tot parks, the bridge at the Locks and a tennis court among other worthwhile projects as well as fund an annual community picnic.
In terms of non LWF residents using the WJCC I can speak only for the experience of LARA. The LARA executive had approached the LWF executive several times over the years to see if some of the residents living in the LARA catchment area could individually pay the area rate to LWF and use the WJCC facility. The response was always in the negative and current assertion that any long time members moving out of the area with family ties in the LWF area could still maintain their WJCC membership is simply inaccurate, particularly in terms of any LARA residents. This may be different today but it certainly did not happen historically as being portrayed.
What I find interesting about the article is that it appears that the same issue of lack of transparency that existed in 1985 relative to the finances of the WJCC is still in play today some 25 years later. I should remind the readers that in 1985 there was no Privacy Act and the information was still not forthcoming from the board of the WJCC. I am of the opinion that most if not all of the information being requested today could be provided in a fashion that would not violate the Privacy Act.
It seems incredible that over the past several years well over a million dollars of ratepayer funds have funneled from the LWF area rate through to the Windsor Junction Community Centre board with what some are saying is a lack of transparency. This was the case in 1985 and appears to be the case in 2010. I have no knowledge of what took place in the intervening years but suspect that it was similar.
What the world learned with the banking fiasco in early 2009 in the United States and abroad was that the world’s finances had quietly drifted to the brink of disaster. This was primarily because not enough people demanded enough answers from the boards of banks as to how they operated and how they spent shareholders’ funds. In the case of banks some board members and employees were paid millions of dollars. In this instance it is difficult to ask volunteer boards for information because the volunteers often take it personally and feel accused of being less than honest when questioned. Volunteers are invaluable to the community and the down side is that if all volunteers walked off the job much of the progress in our towns would grind to a halt. That doesn’t mean the questions should not be asked.
Here are a few I would propose:
1. Does the WJCC board have a budget and is it approved by the LWF board?
2. Who makes the decisions and sets the budget for the WJCC board?
3. Are any positions on the WJCC board paid positions?
4. What are the management salaries, if any of the WJCC board?
5. How is the WJCC board elected or appointed and how long are the terms?
6. Who audits the books of the WJCC or LWF to ensure that there are proper receipts and approvals for all expenditures?
7. Are the constituting documents of the WJCC in order and up to date?
8. Was the annual meeting of LWF conducted is accordance with its bylaws?
The reality is that probably most people have no interest to invest the time to find out how their $100 or so LWF area rate funds are being spent and are quite happy with the service being provided. This doesn’t mean that those who would like to see how their area rate dollars are being spent should have to struggle to get the information. Additionally all boards. volunteer or not, should be conducted in accordance with their governing documents.
Steve, Your reporting is not quite correct. You suggested that all Lara projects were paid for by a yearly grant to the association when in fact the tennis court was constructed in part by funding obtained specifically for that project when I was in council and Michael Creighton and David Lewis were involved .The tot lot park was also constructed by LARA
Steve the tot lot constructed recently by LARA was supported by a grant from the province of 20,000 in addition to other funding over and above the general HRM tax rate and every cent can be accounted for unlike the continued lack of accountability at LWF.
Gary
The points and distinctions I was trying to make were multifacited:
1. Any spending by LARA was always open and easily accounted for in a clear and understandable way.
This was different from my experience when a member of LWF and apparently some LWF ratepayers are still having the same difficulty obtaining clear information today. There was always what I’ll call a hazy realtionship between LWF and the WJCC that seemed to do no more than muddy the waters.
I have no idea if during the period when you were councillor or MLA if you could see how all the money was being spent at the WJCC, but you were certainly in a better position to find out than most people. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how the process worked when you were councillor. It has always seemed odd that so much money flowed through HRM via a tax rate established by so few people and with such apparent lack of control by HRM.
2. In terms of funding LARA does not pay an area rate for its budgetary needs. This is different from the practice at LWF. That was really my point in making the distinction between the two associations. Of course LARA also obtained funding from other sources and as you know you were quite helpful both as councillor and MLA to our association.
I was merely pointing out that LARA does not have an area and still manages to obtain funding from HRM. LWF has the option, as I understand it, not to have an area rate but prefers to continue to put an extra tax on its residents in order to maintain control of the usage of the Windsor Junction Community Centre. This may or may not be the case today but certainly was the case in years past.
3. For clarification, the tot park I was speaking about was constructed in 1986. I am familiar with the recent tot park project and the funding elements that helped make it happen.
My point in regards to any of the projects in the LARA catchment area was that as long as LARA remained part of LWF none would be pursued to be cost shared in the first place. They were always cost shared in one way or another and LWF had no interest in cost sharing projects outside of the WJCC grounds. Lockview area residents were contributing several thousand dollars a year to LWF and the decision was made by a vote in 1985 by a margin of 114-2 that we should no longer be a part of LWF if they refused to cost share even a $3000 project to the tune of $1500.
I believe my earlier historical report was accurate, just not complete. To detail a complete history of the practices of the various volunteer bodies that exist in our area of HRM would make a great novel. I was trying to give a short concise overview.
I think we agree about the lack of accountability at LWF.
As a new member of this board (Director) I have the same similar concerns raised by Steve Boyce but unfortunately I don’t have answers to some of the questions presented.
Confusion is the only word which comes to mind to describe the Dec. 6th AGM so I’ll be looking for more and clear answers when a Board meeting is held. At the very least, Board members should be able to adequately answer ratepayers questions and at this point I don’t believe they can.
This Board has to deal with all the issues/questions and communicate answers to the ratepayers via a newsletter, etc. in the near future if trust is to be earned. If the Board doesn’t deal with this in a reasonable time and manner then my time and effort will be spent elsewhere.
Some residents have asked me how non-ratepayers were able to nominate people to fill positions and vote at the meeting? This concerns me. “IF” this is true then this community needs to re-group and decide what to do with their area rate.
Firstly… This is a very well written Article…Great work District 2 News…
Secondly…the responses are very entertaining and informative…Thank you!
Lastly… I attended the meeting in December and I have the following impressions to share with you…
The money being allocated to any association from Taxpayers should always come with accounatibility…the impression I got was something was just not adding up…sorry for the pun…WJCC shoudl be forced to show where the taxpayers money is being spent and should be accountable for their spending…not with just a line item budget but with descriptions and receipts. I have been involved with community associations in the past that were funded by Tax Payers money and this was a must…why is WJCC excempt from this protocol.
It seemed to me that a lot of people showed up with preconceived notions as to what shape this meeting woudl take…there were a lot of youth at the meeting that spoke up and made kind of rude remarks to other members about the programs being run at the WJCC… I have used these services in the past and was very happy…I do not think anyone at the meeting implied or said anything about funding being cut off or reduced to WJCC but there sure appeared to people there who were under that impression…I think the meeting was trying to say…you get the taxpayers dollars…as taxpayers we have the RIGHT to know how our money is being spent and when the board overseeing this expenditure can not produce records…questions are going to be asked…People involved with WJCC as emploees – current and former along with Board members had their back up before the meeting started…That was certainly Curious
There appeared to be a few people there who were very informed about the by-laws and were quick to get the infamous “and/or” changed to “and” and then pushed to get Sandra Carr removed from the board…it apperas that some people have no respect or idea of what it takes to be a volunteer or be committed to a cause without compensation…plus it is very disturbing that the President was forced out because she was asking for an accountability of OUR MONEY PEOPLE.
There were people at the meeting that I have never seen in the community before who had a lot to say…my suspicion is some of these people were NOT EVEN RESIDENTS AND HAD NO BUSINESS BEING THERE!
That meeting needs to be thrown out…it was a farce…the board that was appointed should be dismantled and a new Meeting and Vote should take place… we…the general public need to be better informed what is happening in their own community…60 people from our community showed up…we should have this meeting at the new Recreational Center in the Gym and get thousands out…we need to more concerned about where our tax dollars go and who is controlling the purse strings…
Thank You
WOW, First I would like to say that I am a new resident to this area and I live on Lockview Road. This seams like a real bag of snakes and I obviously need to become involved in the community in which I live. I need some clarity on the various organizations and as a result have some questions
First Question, am I part of LARA?
Second Question, is LARA a component of another association?
As a newbie to this area, and as someone that has no past vested interest my first instinct would be to have appropriate authorities involved to investigate financial practices. As for as the question dealing with non ratepayers ability to vote or not to vote, it seems rather academic; If you are not a ratepayer than you should have no influence on allocations of monies or who can sit on what boards.
To New Resident – Welcome to Fall River.
Since you live on Lockview Road you are a member of LARA which is the acronym for Lockview Area Residents Association. LARA is not a component of another association although there is nothing preventing LARA from partnering with other volunteer community associations for the betterment of the larger area.
Its reason d’etre is for the betterment of the LARA catchment area and the greater Fall River area through promotion and participation in various community projects and activities.
I hope this answers your two questions.
Just one man, if you as you stated need any incentive to get involved in your association I would suggest you now have it. Steve, you are right , as an elected representative and as a private citizen I have tried to get accountability from the LWF and with the same measyre of success.
Unfortunately all too many politicians/ elected officials think along the lines of Steve Boyce’s political friend— “A wise experienced politician once said that nobody gives you power, you have to take it.” That is why we have the problems we have today and that is why politicians/ elected officials are the subject of so much distrust.
Every organization has a constitution/ bylaws/ Acts of incorporation, by which the “members” of the organization transfer powers to the individuals who they elected to lead the organization. Unfortunately once elected to those positions some individuals do in fact take additional powers and represent themselves and their own interests over the best interests of the individuals who elected them. These same individuals believe they are accountable to no one. That does not make them “wise”; it makes them morally deficient. I am sure Steve sees that trait displayed in one organization he currently serves on.
I have read all the columns and comments posted on the LWF Association and I have concluded the following:
a) The association is NOT being run with good, fundamental organizational discipline. It lacks sound principles and its leaders lack understanding of sound operational practices. It operates like a family business, relying on family and friends.
b) The relationship between the LWF and WJCC is too cozy and does not allow for proper independent oversight by the Board of the LWF. If the WJCC is a separate and distinct organization, as it seams to be, then there should be no LWF Board members serving as employees or directors of WJCC. That would be a potential conflict. A member in conflict cannot serve 2 masters.
c) The LWF Association appears to have all the necessary authority to do what needs to be done to bring about accountability and transparency. The Executive / Board just do not know how to make it happen or do not want to make it happen because of the things reflected in A) and B) above.
d) The bylaws were changed and approved. Bylaws are sacred, they are the law. It is scary that the executive and entire Board approved and brought forward a revised set of bylaws they did not understand. Once the bylaws were approved they are the law. There is no question that anyone who was a non member as defined by the bylaws should resign from the Board and anyone who is a nonmember is not to participate in any further business conducted at the meeting. Some comments reflect this as a technicality. Afraid not—can I go vote in NB because I live next door. Once “technicalities” are used to work around the bylaws then there are no bylaws. Sounds like a family and friends issue to me.
e) There are many comments about accountability and transparency, but when it came time to revise the bylaws, there was considerable secrecy. Would it not have been appropriate to advise and consult all members of the association about the revised bylaws?
Volunteers are very important to the community, but sometimes they get so close to the cause they miss the big picture. These volunteers deserve our thanks for making our community better. However I think their job would be easier if they accepted the need for openness and transparency as opposed to finding reasons not to do it
Barry
The quote about power I was referring to was in relation to the following concept:
My experience is that many of our elected officials defer too much to staff and forget that they have been elected by the residents to represent their wishes.
Staff at most levels of government act as if they have more authority and power than the elected officials. If the elected officials don’t exercise the authority and power entrusted them by their constituents and by default allow staff to make all the decisions and set the agenda they have no power.
If Barry Dalrymple allows staff to set the agenda for his area of HRM rather than listening to the wishes of his constituents he is not required and we are better off getting rid of our councillor and saving the salary. If Percy Paris allows staff to set the agenda for his area of the province rather than listening to his constituents we are better off getting rid of our MLA and saving the salary.
This is what is meant by taking the power. Our elected officials can no longer be content with sitting back and letting unelected bureaucrats determine the agenda. They have to seize the power they have been accorded by their office and use it for the good of all constituents. On the other hand perhaps they support the development plan being proposed for Laurie Park.
It seems to me that both Barry and Percy have been conspicuous by their silence on the Laurie Park issue. They use this website to advertise for themselves with our tax dollars. They should also take advantage of the site, like many of us, to post their thoughts on this issue for all of us to read.
One wonders what they are afraid of……………
Steve, , the Laurie Park issue is a Provincial issue ,and as you stated recently when excusing our MLA and MP from failed attendance at the LWF meeting, perhaps it is time for MLA Paris to come up big on this issue . IT is his jurisdiction. I have talked to Barry and it is quite clear where he stands.
I would like to get back to the discussion of the issues facing the LWF Association. Our councillor, in another article, has indicated there is very little he can do, so it is up to the members to force the Board to act. Gary, you are very active with this organization and in the community as a whole. Your Hinesight column was informative about what happened, but we have to move forward.
Above I posted some direct comments about the issues that need to be addressed, in my opinion. Gary, I suspect your voice carrys some weight with the LWF Board and I suspect the directors will listen to you.
Therefore I request that you review my conclusions and offer us, your comments, in the hope we can bring about change.
One thing I do not understand- why the bylaws had to be changed to bring about accountabliity and transparency? I have never heard of the bylaws preventing accountability or transparency. Sounds like stall tactics to me, by someone in power wanting to protect their power, or afraid of members really seeing what is going on. I think it would also be valuable if you could tell us the relationship between the old bylaws and the lack of accountability and transparency.
Given our current councillor believes this issue is beyond his scope maybe you can help lead us to action. The Board as a whole has a major hole to dig out of to bring about the changes that will restore the faith of the members.