Googling on the Internet is fun. One never knows the gems that are around until one looks. I found this interesting quote:
Windsor Star 10-10-2002. "It was left to Halberstadt, the defiant whipping boy, to diagnose the malady at city hall: "The administration treats city council like they're marginalized. That's the culture here and it needs to be broken."
It's still the same now if you read today's Star and if you watched Alan's recent Face-to-Face interview! And Halberstadt is still leading the charge. The only difference is that it is not the Hurst Administration that he is attacking but the Francis Administration.
Can anyone explain it? Why do they change? What is it that happens to politicians when they come into power? How can they forget everything they stood for before?
One obvious explanation is that it must be different when one is in power because now you have to protect your turf when before it was easy to attack that of someone else.
I can remember asking a local politician why he did not take a certain action that in my opinion seemed like the right thing to do. The answer was simple. He did not want the same thing happening to him so he was not prepared to take the action required! Or remember the politician who attacked secret meetings and now is part of them endorsing proposals in camera.
No this BLOG is not about Harper/Emerson compared with Martin/Stronach. That is inexplicable. I am going to talk about something more mundane: legal fees and consultants.
I am sure you read the story in the Star today:
Windsor Star 10-10-2002. "It was left to Halberstadt, the defiant whipping boy, to diagnose the malady at city hall: "The administration treats city council like they're marginalized. That's the culture here and it needs to be broken."
It's still the same now if you read today's Star and if you watched Alan's recent Face-to-Face interview! And Halberstadt is still leading the charge. The only difference is that it is not the Hurst Administration that he is attacking but the Francis Administration.
Can anyone explain it? Why do they change? What is it that happens to politicians when they come into power? How can they forget everything they stood for before?
One obvious explanation is that it must be different when one is in power because now you have to protect your turf when before it was easy to attack that of someone else.
I can remember asking a local politician why he did not take a certain action that in my opinion seemed like the right thing to do. The answer was simple. He did not want the same thing happening to him so he was not prepared to take the action required! Or remember the politician who attacked secret meetings and now is part of them endorsing proposals in camera.
No this BLOG is not about Harper/Emerson compared with Martin/Stronach. That is inexplicable. I am going to talk about something more mundane: legal fees and consultants.
I am sure you read the story in the Star today:
- "A city councillor wants to know why the city won't release details of the costs for consultants and lawyers involved in the border file...The Ward 3 councillor [Halberstadt] said there better be "a good reason" for the information to be kept from public perusal, otherwise it should be released."
What was interesting to me was that the Star reported that the fees were $1.7M in August, the approximate sum that Eddie said was spent when he was interviewed by John Fairley in his year-end Face-to-Face show but now the Councillor tells us the fees are $2 million.
I am sorry, but I find it hard to believe that not very much was spent in 4 months but then about $300K was spent in 2 months.
Sam Schwartz told me that he made at least 50 presentations similar to the ones he made to Detroit Council so they must have cost something. Are they part of the fees? How many consultants have been used? How do they bill---directly to the City or through the outside law firm? Who is monitoring the fees being charged so that we are assured that taxpayers get value for our money? Are these legal fees a budget item or do they come out of a contingency fund?
I found it interesting that the Star story did not ask the Mayor why he thought the fees information should not be released and why we should not know who the consultants were and what they were doing. But then again, the Star could not ask him could they after what Eddie had said in the past. Let me remind you what he said:
1) Windsor Star 04-16-2003
"councillor Eddie Francis wants to know what messages are being communicated to the two senior levels of government on behalf of the city. Francis has requested a report from city administration about how many lobbyists are on retainer with the city, who authorized retaining them, what issues they're dealing with and what positions they're communicating to senior levels of government. "
2) Windsor Star 04-19-2003
"Councillor Eddie Francis, who requested a report on the city's lobbyists at Monday's council meeting, was surprised to learn of Enterprise Canada and its various ties, including the city.
"This is concerning on a number of levels," Francis said. "You have an individual working for the city who neither I or any of my colleagues were aware of. I don't know what's being said or done.
"...We need to know who's been hired and for what purpose...
Francis said the only message from the city on the border issue should be the resolutions passed by council."
3) Windsor Star Editorial 04-23-2003
"Windsor councillors should be fully informed about any taxpayers' money that is being spent to supposedly further the city's interests. However, Councillor Eddie Francis has raised a legitimate concern that when it comes to hiring lobbyists, council isn't getting the full story.
As a result, Francis wants a report from the city administration listing the number of lobbyists who are on retainer, the person or persons responsible for hiring them and what issues lobbyists are dealing with and what positions they are pitching to senior governments. It's a reasonable request and one that should be quickly answered...
"The last time (this) happened and council raised the issue, we were told we would have been informed about the lobbyists had we asked," said Councillor Francis. "I don't want to see the same situation arise again, so I'm asking."
However, no councillor should have to make a special request to find out how the city is using lobbyists. Tax dollars are involved and public issues are at stake."
4) Windsor Star 05-22-2003
"Councillor Eddie Francis, who first raised the question of lobbyists, said he was unaware the city had hired lobbyists to deal with gaming issues.
"I'm just trying to pursue the issue of value-for-dollar, what purpose they're serving and whether or not we're getting that service," Francis said. "I'm not arguing about whether or not they should be retained, I just want to make sure we're getting what we want from them..."
Council also decided to request a periodic report from lobbyists outlining their efforts on behalf of the city."
I am sorry, but I find it hard to believe that not very much was spent in 4 months but then about $300K was spent in 2 months.
Sam Schwartz told me that he made at least 50 presentations similar to the ones he made to Detroit Council so they must have cost something. Are they part of the fees? How many consultants have been used? How do they bill---directly to the City or through the outside law firm? Who is monitoring the fees being charged so that we are assured that taxpayers get value for our money? Are these legal fees a budget item or do they come out of a contingency fund?
I found it interesting that the Star story did not ask the Mayor why he thought the fees information should not be released and why we should not know who the consultants were and what they were doing. But then again, the Star could not ask him could they after what Eddie had said in the past. Let me remind you what he said:
1) Windsor Star 04-16-2003
"councillor Eddie Francis wants to know what messages are being communicated to the two senior levels of government on behalf of the city. Francis has requested a report from city administration about how many lobbyists are on retainer with the city, who authorized retaining them, what issues they're dealing with and what positions they're communicating to senior levels of government. "
2) Windsor Star 04-19-2003
"Councillor Eddie Francis, who requested a report on the city's lobbyists at Monday's council meeting, was surprised to learn of Enterprise Canada and its various ties, including the city.
"This is concerning on a number of levels," Francis said. "You have an individual working for the city who neither I or any of my colleagues were aware of. I don't know what's being said or done.
"...We need to know who's been hired and for what purpose...
Francis said the only message from the city on the border issue should be the resolutions passed by council."
3) Windsor Star Editorial 04-23-2003
"Windsor councillors should be fully informed about any taxpayers' money that is being spent to supposedly further the city's interests. However, Councillor Eddie Francis has raised a legitimate concern that when it comes to hiring lobbyists, council isn't getting the full story.
As a result, Francis wants a report from the city administration listing the number of lobbyists who are on retainer, the person or persons responsible for hiring them and what issues lobbyists are dealing with and what positions they are pitching to senior governments. It's a reasonable request and one that should be quickly answered...
"The last time (this) happened and council raised the issue, we were told we would have been informed about the lobbyists had we asked," said Councillor Francis. "I don't want to see the same situation arise again, so I'm asking."
However, no councillor should have to make a special request to find out how the city is using lobbyists. Tax dollars are involved and public issues are at stake."
4) Windsor Star 05-22-2003
"Councillor Eddie Francis, who first raised the question of lobbyists, said he was unaware the city had hired lobbyists to deal with gaming issues.
"I'm just trying to pursue the issue of value-for-dollar, what purpose they're serving and whether or not we're getting that service," Francis said. "I'm not arguing about whether or not they should be retained, I just want to make sure we're getting what we want from them..."
Council also decided to request a periodic report from lobbyists outlining their efforts on behalf of the city."
Let me try and guess what is going on. The bills are horrific, the consultants numerous and the results are not what they were expected to be. The strategy at City Hall was to spend, spend, spend and when the Senior Levels made a deal with the $300 Million BIF funding, then Windsor would get its money back so who would be the wiser.
Well that is NOT happening and so Windsor taxpayers may get stuck with paying it all. That could never do so the stall is in. One might just have to do a Municipal Freedom of Information request to get the informtaion if Councillor Halberstadt is rebuffed. What a disgrace from an "open and transparent" Council. And the Premier wants to extend their term to 4 years in future!
I found an interesting comment on legal bills:
- "for a legal account to qualify for exemption under the municipal equivalent of section19, its contents must relate in a direct and tangible way to the seeking, formulating or provision of legal advice. On this basis, the application of section 19 to a legal account (or to a part of such an account) must be judged on a document by document basis. It necessarily follows that a record will not automatically attract the section 19 exemption simply because it is characterized as a legal account."
No comments:
Post a Comment