Tonite council heard the following concerns from Ratepayers:
1. A proposed medical waste sort facility on an adjacent 1st. Nation Property.
2. A quarry site operating outside of existing bylaw regulations.
3. An illegal fire and demolition on a former camp site.
All these events took place in Ward 1 and their representative Clr. Bill White made a passionate plea for the township to actively investigate these matters, given the potential for personal injury and possible environmental damage. "Let's find out how these events happened". "Let's find out how we can prevent their future occurance".
Sounds like continuous improvement to me. I can support that.
So what was the response from the rest of council. "We'll write a letter". That's it!! That's their response to crisis! I wonder if they have any idea where to address these letters? Yes ladies and gentlemen this is your township working to protect your interests.
The only time you'll see any kind of enthusiasm from this group, there either voting themselves a raise, or levying a new tax on ratepayers. Don't want to offend any potential investor, thinking of coming to Ramara, regardless if their actions my by potentially illegal.
When I left the meeting, I felt I had to comment on this council's lack of enthusiasm. Shame on you Ramara Council. I wish you let your constituents know of your lethargy, during the campaign! Wake up you clowns!! If your not up to the task, then resign.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
Water Rates (Dis)harmony in Ramara
Ramara council meeting in General Committee on April 23rd voted 4-3 (Dep. Mayor Clarke, Ward 1 Clr. White and Ward 3 Clr. Neher voting against) to approve the ’07 water rates. As a result for those of you in Ramara privileged to be served by municipal water, depending on where you reside, you could be paying somewhere between $450 and $1350 a year for your water.
These differences in rates resulted when councillors voted down the proposal by Deputy Mayor Clarke to consolidate all existing debts and surpluses. This would have established a unified rate of $479 a year for all users. Ramara had never unified its network of 8 separate wells. Sites fewer subscribers per well had to carry a greater burden of the costs to build and maintain those wells and therefore some wells now carry outstanding debts, while other sites are in the black, and their new water rate reflect the fact they carry no outstanding debts. A consolidated rate would have pooled all existing debts and surpluses, dividing the remaining debts equally among all existing water users.
Council voted along the lines of the haves (those large settlement well-sites) and the have nots (smaller isolated wells). Mayor Duffy though he does not represent any single ward, and should have been factoring in the concerns of all users, represented the swing vote. He voted against creating a unified rate. Had council passed the consolidated water rate, it would have gone a long way in creating greater harmony among the various settlement areas in Ramara.
Harmony within the township’s isolated communities, is a theme that appears rather frequently in recent township propaganda as it tries to promote the benefits of expanding municipal wastewater services to the village of Brechin. Benefits that the township feels should result in the use taxpayer dollars to pay some of the capital costs of the expansion. Witness some recent passages made by the township:
“…. To promote innovative partnerships and joint participation among our citizens….”
“….. I am asking the community to contribute (to the Brechin Sewer expansion) to make this settlement (Brechin) a Stayner or Elmvale.”
How has councils actions tonight moved Ramara in the direction of harmony? To me it shounds hypocritical to say on the one hand the community should not fund the costs for water, while on the other hand they say the community should fund the costs for sewers.
If anything good came from tonight’s actions by council, it clearly defines a precedent for any funding of the capital costs for the Brechin Sewers expansion.
Council actions clearly state that it is the individual users (residents of Brechin) and not the community (Ramara ratepayers) who should pay all capital costs. Therefore it would be hypocritical for council to approve any further use of ratepayer taxes to extend sewer service to Brechin.
I would now expect council to ask the users of the sewer network to return to general ratepayer the approx. $500 000 in taxes that have been used to finance various studies and requests for funding. Let’s consider the $500 000 to be an interest free loan, payable over the next 25 years.
($500 000 / 179 Brechin users today) / 25 years = $112 per year from each location in Brechin given back to all ratepayers in Ramara. Of course this number will go down if the supporters of “if you build it, they will come,” (Duffy, O’Donnell and Bates), are right and the sewers start bringing lots and lots of investment into the Village of Brechin.
Thanks Ramara council for your actions to night. It has clarified the funding formula of the Brechin sewer expansion for all the other ratepayers. You have clearly stated that you are against using any ratepayer taxes to fund non-universal township infrastructure.
I hope you are consistent and act accordingly.
These differences in rates resulted when councillors voted down the proposal by Deputy Mayor Clarke to consolidate all existing debts and surpluses. This would have established a unified rate of $479 a year for all users. Ramara had never unified its network of 8 separate wells. Sites fewer subscribers per well had to carry a greater burden of the costs to build and maintain those wells and therefore some wells now carry outstanding debts, while other sites are in the black, and their new water rate reflect the fact they carry no outstanding debts. A consolidated rate would have pooled all existing debts and surpluses, dividing the remaining debts equally among all existing water users.
Council voted along the lines of the haves (those large settlement well-sites) and the have nots (smaller isolated wells). Mayor Duffy though he does not represent any single ward, and should have been factoring in the concerns of all users, represented the swing vote. He voted against creating a unified rate. Had council passed the consolidated water rate, it would have gone a long way in creating greater harmony among the various settlement areas in Ramara.
Harmony within the township’s isolated communities, is a theme that appears rather frequently in recent township propaganda as it tries to promote the benefits of expanding municipal wastewater services to the village of Brechin. Benefits that the township feels should result in the use taxpayer dollars to pay some of the capital costs of the expansion. Witness some recent passages made by the township:
“…. To promote innovative partnerships and joint participation among our citizens….”
“….. I am asking the community to contribute (to the Brechin Sewer expansion) to make this settlement (Brechin) a Stayner or Elmvale.”
How has councils actions tonight moved Ramara in the direction of harmony? To me it shounds hypocritical to say on the one hand the community should not fund the costs for water, while on the other hand they say the community should fund the costs for sewers.
If anything good came from tonight’s actions by council, it clearly defines a precedent for any funding of the capital costs for the Brechin Sewers expansion.
Council actions clearly state that it is the individual users (residents of Brechin) and not the community (Ramara ratepayers) who should pay all capital costs. Therefore it would be hypocritical for council to approve any further use of ratepayer taxes to extend sewer service to Brechin.
I would now expect council to ask the users of the sewer network to return to general ratepayer the approx. $500 000 in taxes that have been used to finance various studies and requests for funding. Let’s consider the $500 000 to be an interest free loan, payable over the next 25 years.
($500 000 / 179 Brechin users today) / 25 years = $112 per year from each location in Brechin given back to all ratepayers in Ramara. Of course this number will go down if the supporters of “if you build it, they will come,” (Duffy, O’Donnell and Bates), are right and the sewers start bringing lots and lots of investment into the Village of Brechin.
Thanks Ramara council for your actions to night. It has clarified the funding formula of the Brechin sewer expansion for all the other ratepayers. You have clearly stated that you are against using any ratepayer taxes to fund non-universal township infrastructure.
I hope you are consistent and act accordingly.
Ramara Councilors Not Really Interested in Reform
The sound of silence was deafening on April 23rd. at Council's Committee meeting when Councilor Neher opened discussions from Staff Report CD-17-07 regarding Long Term Initiatives. For a moment you could hear the sounds of the peeping frogs outside.
This silence was due to the majority of the members at the head table were uncertain what exactly the report was for, and the implications on how it will affect them. Getting this item onto the agenda was championed by Clr. Neher, and I believe to be one of the smartest actions of this current council. This change marks a reform in way things should be done, and like all change, most participants in the process are hesitant to embrace reforms, until they can see the benefits, of the reform.
Members of council should see this reform as a means for them to regain control of the legislative process back from unelected municipal staffers. Township Clerk Richard Bates, who authored the about report understands what these reform mean and sees the threat to his ability to control the council. His ability to define township priorities could be removed from his exclusive domain.
The Clerk's ability to the control what and when councilors access key information, is the source of his greatest power. By releasing key data in bits and pieces, haphazardly, Richard Bates manipulated the members of council into approving the tendering the Brechin Sewer Project before all the facts have been given to ratepayers, at a public forum.
In defining Long Term Priorities council regains control of the legislative agenda. In doing so elected officials, who are beholden to their constituents, can establish the priorities for the township, rather then the current system where unelected staffers appear to be in control.
Hear are some ideas that councilors could investigate, which currently don’t appear to be priorities for municipal staff:
•Public Participation: Identify and remove barriers to participation / Promote the input of ratepayers
•Funding Alternatives: Why has Ramara been so poor in securing Upper Level Grants and funding? / How does Ramara compare with other adjacent municipalities? / How can township generate revenue?
•Communication: Current methods don’t notify ratepayers, so that citizens have not participated in developing policy
•Risk Assessment: What are the potential liabilities to the township / Who is responsible for maintaining things like culverts?
•Work Practices & Policy Statements: Review or Established guidelines/methods/standards for the flow if information so that billings occur in a time (ie Emerg Sevices billing after 60 days) (ie wait times standards)
I have highlighted just of few concerns of ratepayers that have come before council meetings I have attended. Ratepayers can raise these concerns to council, either by petitions or deputations. Unfortunately the township is very slow to address anything that does conform to the priorities of Richard Bates. This must end NOW!
Members of Ramara council should embrace any reforms that can restore its ability to oversee township operations. This will not happen until you regain legislative control by reigning in the powers of Richard Bates.
This silence was due to the majority of the members at the head table were uncertain what exactly the report was for, and the implications on how it will affect them. Getting this item onto the agenda was championed by Clr. Neher, and I believe to be one of the smartest actions of this current council. This change marks a reform in way things should be done, and like all change, most participants in the process are hesitant to embrace reforms, until they can see the benefits, of the reform.
Members of council should see this reform as a means for them to regain control of the legislative process back from unelected municipal staffers. Township Clerk Richard Bates, who authored the about report understands what these reform mean and sees the threat to his ability to control the council. His ability to define township priorities could be removed from his exclusive domain.
The Clerk's ability to the control what and when councilors access key information, is the source of his greatest power. By releasing key data in bits and pieces, haphazardly, Richard Bates manipulated the members of council into approving the tendering the Brechin Sewer Project before all the facts have been given to ratepayers, at a public forum.
In defining Long Term Priorities council regains control of the legislative agenda. In doing so elected officials, who are beholden to their constituents, can establish the priorities for the township, rather then the current system where unelected staffers appear to be in control.
Hear are some ideas that councilors could investigate, which currently don’t appear to be priorities for municipal staff:
•Public Participation: Identify and remove barriers to participation / Promote the input of ratepayers
•Funding Alternatives: Why has Ramara been so poor in securing Upper Level Grants and funding? / How does Ramara compare with other adjacent municipalities? / How can township generate revenue?
•Communication: Current methods don’t notify ratepayers, so that citizens have not participated in developing policy
•Risk Assessment: What are the potential liabilities to the township / Who is responsible for maintaining things like culverts?
•Work Practices & Policy Statements: Review or Established guidelines/methods/standards for the flow if information so that billings occur in a time (ie Emerg Sevices billing after 60 days) (ie wait times standards)
I have highlighted just of few concerns of ratepayers that have come before council meetings I have attended. Ratepayers can raise these concerns to council, either by petitions or deputations. Unfortunately the township is very slow to address anything that does conform to the priorities of Richard Bates. This must end NOW!
Members of Ramara council should embrace any reforms that can restore its ability to oversee township operations. This will not happen until you regain legislative control by reigning in the powers of Richard Bates.
Ramara Council Approves the Tendering of Brechin Sewers
In a 5-2 vote, (Clrs. White and Neher dissenting), Ramara council has authorized the township to tender the Brechin Sewer Project. The motion was put forward at the April 16th, at the meeting of Council’s Planning Committee in Undey. Township Clerk Richard Bates tabled the motion in his report Report CD-17-07.
At a special council meeting on March 30th., members of council saw a presentation from the township’s engineering consultants CC Tatham about the project that would bring municipal wastewater access to the residents of the village of Brechin. Members of council had numerous questions after the presentation, and requested township staff to prepare a report to address them. CD-17-07 tables the township’s formal response to these questions raised.
I have to congratulate Clrs. White and Neher for their decision not to support taking the sewer project to tender. They recognized the flaws and omissions contained in Mr. Bates report and strongly rejected any launching of such a massive undertaking, prior to having a public meeting to discuss the merits of the project. This public meeting is scheduled for the week of May 8.
In his report Richard Bates indicated the urgency for offering the project for tendering as soon as possible, in order to avoid the possibility of having potential contractors fully booked with other projects. If there existed a definitive timeline, why then didn’t council have this item decided by now? I put the majority of the blame on Richard Bates. As the township Clerk, he controls councils’ agendas. This means he controls what, how and when information gets before councilors. Council's role is to provide guidance for the municipality. They act on the information presented to them. Why was council advised only on April 16th of the urgency to go to tender now?
Could the fact that the township had not made its decision whether or not to proceed with the Brechin Sewers be part of his grand strategy to bring undue influence certain members of Ramara Council? His report contains threats to members of council, in that if they don’t act now, then you may be responsible for onerous harm for some of the townships citizens. These threats were effective in that it may have resulted in Clr Kahlers and Deputy Mayor Clarke’s support for his motion. Given Clr. O’Donnell and Mayor Duffy’s “If we build it, they will come,” love for this project, their support, regardless of its cost, are well known. In the Richard Bates delivered the 4 votes (of 7) that ensured the passage of his motion. (Clr Appleby represents the residents of Brechin, who are the main benefactors of the project, so his approval may have been a virtual lock).
Have we witnessed a Coup d’Etat in Ramara? Is Richard Bates the defacto leader in Ramara? I feel the current council needs to review what has happened here. They need to recognize the bullying tactics of Richard Bates and implement the necessary reforms in order to take back legislative control in Ramara Township, and immunized themselves from any future attacks by Richard Bates, or those who follow him.
At a special council meeting on March 30th., members of council saw a presentation from the township’s engineering consultants CC Tatham about the project that would bring municipal wastewater access to the residents of the village of Brechin. Members of council had numerous questions after the presentation, and requested township staff to prepare a report to address them. CD-17-07 tables the township’s formal response to these questions raised.
I have to congratulate Clrs. White and Neher for their decision not to support taking the sewer project to tender. They recognized the flaws and omissions contained in Mr. Bates report and strongly rejected any launching of such a massive undertaking, prior to having a public meeting to discuss the merits of the project. This public meeting is scheduled for the week of May 8.
In his report Richard Bates indicated the urgency for offering the project for tendering as soon as possible, in order to avoid the possibility of having potential contractors fully booked with other projects. If there existed a definitive timeline, why then didn’t council have this item decided by now? I put the majority of the blame on Richard Bates. As the township Clerk, he controls councils’ agendas. This means he controls what, how and when information gets before councilors. Council's role is to provide guidance for the municipality. They act on the information presented to them. Why was council advised only on April 16th of the urgency to go to tender now?
Could the fact that the township had not made its decision whether or not to proceed with the Brechin Sewers be part of his grand strategy to bring undue influence certain members of Ramara Council? His report contains threats to members of council, in that if they don’t act now, then you may be responsible for onerous harm for some of the townships citizens. These threats were effective in that it may have resulted in Clr Kahlers and Deputy Mayor Clarke’s support for his motion. Given Clr. O’Donnell and Mayor Duffy’s “If we build it, they will come,” love for this project, their support, regardless of its cost, are well known. In the Richard Bates delivered the 4 votes (of 7) that ensured the passage of his motion. (Clr Appleby represents the residents of Brechin, who are the main benefactors of the project, so his approval may have been a virtual lock).
Have we witnessed a Coup d’Etat in Ramara? Is Richard Bates the defacto leader in Ramara? I feel the current council needs to review what has happened here. They need to recognize the bullying tactics of Richard Bates and implement the necessary reforms in order to take back legislative control in Ramara Township, and immunized themselves from any future attacks by Richard Bates, or those who follow him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
