Police Chief Ebenezer Beazley and Mayor Jacob Kelly

The cash registers are ringing in a green Christmas it seems. At least in HRM's tax coffers if no where else thanks to the senseless annual (most years) winter parking ban. Mayor Kelly lead council and the Police Chief Beazley lead police department (seen at left not exactly as pictured) have teamed up to slam dunk tens of thousands of potential Christmas cheer dollars into the city's pocket. Councillor Sue Uteck is quoted as calling the ban “a tax grab on behalf of HRM,”, Next time Mayor Kelly asks if there is any new business in at council
can we expect to see Councillor Uteck stand and put forth a motion to do away with the ban? I doubt it! Get on the phone or your E Mail and tell Mayor Kelly enough is enough. The city will give you any number of reasons to keep the ban but the the truth is it's a very successful cash cow they get to milk annually.
Merry Christmas from the Halifax Gazette
Bruce DeVenne

The Zipper

Are you tired of passing a pot hole being repaired and seeing 10-15 people there? One working and the rest standing around? It doesn't have to be that way. Why don't Mayor Kelly and Council order a machine called the Zipper, it speeds up road work, cuts down on cost and does an efficient finished job in a cost efficient way. Seems these aspects of spending our tax dollars seldom, if ever, enter Council's collective minds. On the site below there are a number of taped testimonials to the efficiency of this machine. We can't afford the ever increasing burden of taxes taken from us by all levels of government. It's time government is forced to live in the real world like us. They have to learn our pockets are not bottomless and they can't continue to keep raising taxes and assessments or inventing new and improved user fees. it's time they created new and improved ways to spend our money. Take a good look at this machine and imagine what it would mean to us, the HRM taxpayer in savings, then let Council know by E Mailing them using the E Mail lists on the left had side of the page.
http://www.asphaltzipper.com/what-it-does/road-and-street-repairs/applications/



Bruce DeVenne

The Truth About The Big Tax Shift in HRM Thanks to The Coast

Mayor Kelly and the other members of HRM Council call it "tax reform". I have referred to it as a "tax re-shuffle" from the first and this article in the coast out lines exactly what is taking place in dollars and cents. What the people forced into HRM by John Savage and Liberal Party have to remember is this: the people who you elected to represent you on council not only sat there while this took place they voted for it. Click on the URL below to see exactly what the representatives of those people in the old "county" are doing to you.

http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/archives/2009/11/25/halifaxs-tax-reform-war-begins-in-earnest&cb=69298c583b288a689e33775f88b12754&sort=desc#readerComments=


For an example of real tax reform that will address the issues of assessment based taxes (plus and ever growing list of "user fees") see
http://nshrm.blogspot.com/2009/04/true-tax-reform-for-your-consideration.html

As always you can express your opinions by using the E mail index on the left.

Bruce DeVenne

EBay.com beware high and hidden shipping costs

If you are buying on E Bay and live in Canada BEWARE of the following.
Some E Bay sellers too Lazy to go to the post office and mail something. They use "Flat rate shipping and or Priority shipping. You'll see them on the site. A single train car that may cost you $3 or $4 to buy then they want $25 or more to ship it.

Federal Express (Fed Ex) and United Parcel Service (UPS) will both bring your item in through Montreal. You may get a "shipping fee" from the seller for $10 or so BUT beware. When Fed Ex or UPS brings it through the customs they will send you a bill for $40 or more dollars extra because the "Brokered" you parcel. This means they've collected the sales tax. The straight postal service also collects sales tax but only charge $5 for the service.

I bought an Item for $25 and the seller shipped it to me via UPS and they wanted $50 before they would deliver it and they have your parcel. You pay it or good-bye parcel. I fought it out and got it for what the post office would have charged but you won't do this to often avoid these horrendous extra charges avoid these three methods of shipping at all costs.

Here we go again. This time H1N1

To quote Yogi Berra . "It's Deja-vu all over again". First HIV in the blood then Hep C in the blood and with the H1N1 pandemic looming the Canadian Governments are, once again showing their total inability to deal with any type of crises.Who should be vaccinated? Depends on what province you live in. How is the vaccine given out? Haphazardly instead of through private physicians. How much vaccine is available? No where near enough. Who are the busiest people involved in this? The spin doctors.
Knowing the Governments' past record we can be sure of a few things. The job will never be fully and properly done. Canadians will die needlessly and, somewhere down the line, a group of class action lawyers will become instant multi-millionaires rubber stamping some government compensation deal.

In the mean time there will be no problem finding money like the $4 billion Ottawa spent trying to buy a seat or two in Quebec by-elections. Money to run be-elections because politicians quit after being elected Andrew Younger and Rodney MacDonald to mention a couple). The millions spent by provincial and civic politicians under the title "discretionary spending" where public funds are passed out by politicians with no public scrutiny or accountability.

It never fails to amaze me the money that's available for this list while the blood supply was allowed to run unprotected, health care regularly declines, user fees expand their base and increase in amounts and taxes on your home increase annually.

If you are happy with the taxes you pay and the services you receive for those taxes fine if you are not get on the phone, fax machine or e mail and tell them. I ran for council last year and one thing I heard frequently was, "I don't vote you're all the same". Here's the NDP's chance to prove they are better. Get the vaccine out....to everybody. Yes everybody! Despite what the spin doctors are telling us people that, according to them, don't have to be vaccinated, are dying from swine flu on a regular basis.

To contact any member of city council or other political leaders simple click on their name on the left speak up now. Tell them enough is enough to get their acts together.

Canada Post and other government cash grabs at all levels

I received a small parcel from Idaho. Postal cost, $5.99 USA ($6.25 CDN). I asked the postal clerk how much to mail it back. She weighed it and said, $11.40 over 75% more but, she added, it's going out of the country so you don't have to pay GST. Going to a Canadian address you'd have an extra 13% GST tacked on. I raised this issue with my MP, Peter Stoffer NDP, and he explained that the Post Office is no longer a government service but is now a Crown Cooperation. As such they are operating with annual profits which they turn over to the federal government. They have turned over hundreds of millions over the years. Canada Postal Service? Just another way to gouge the public.This great Canadian institution sells flat rate shipping to the USA giant E Bay but refuses it to Canadians and Canadian companies. As usual we are bled to the max.
A new outfit on the scene, the Canadian Internet Registration Authority or CIRA, deemed necessary and mandated into existence by Ottawa but not paid for by Ottawa. The extra $8 plus that is costs to register a .CA name goes to these people. Thy collect over $10 million a year from Canadians using .CA web sites.
Last (in this letter) but not least the combined $76 billion dollars drained from UIC and Canada pensions. Successive federal governments have raided these funds taking $56 billion from UIC and $20 billion from the pension funds. Illegal you say? It would be in the private sector but the politically appointed hacks on the Supreme Court ruled in Ottawa's favour in both these cases. How does Ottawa plan on covering these loses? Easy by going back into the bottomless pockets of the Canadian tax payer and worker. UIC rates will be rising shortly. Every day it becomes clearer that there are two sets of laws one for the masses and one for Government. If the governments don't like the laws governing they can......

(A) Ignore them (Halifax City Council)

(B) Change them (Nova Scotia NDP Provincial government) or...

(C) Have the courts OK what you did (Ottawa).

Perhaps it's time we just all sat down and did nothing until Federal, Provincial and Civic governments start sending our money with the dedication and care that they collect it from us.

As always you can contact your elected representative using the list on the left.

Later this week, How do I tax thee, let me count the ways.

Beware of Aliant Bell cell phone service

Beware of Aliant/Bell cell phone service. I got tired of paying all the extra add on's from this duo so I changed servers. I had my numbers switched over and, I thought, I would then cancel my Aliant/Bell service. Not so says Aliant's call phone service supplier Bell. We suspend you service for 30 days for which you will be billed as if it was operational THEN we will cancel it.
When I took the service I went into the Aliant Kiosk and it took just minutes to be connected to the Aliant/Bell system. Why does it take 30 days to be disconnected?
If my service is suspended by Aliant/Bell how can I be billed.
I will be paying them for a month's service that I will not receive. I will be paying them in addition to paying my service supplier. I will be paying them despite the fact that I told them to disconnect me as quickly and easily as they connected me.
In my opinion stay away from this duo unless you cannot get anybody else.

Frank Magazine behind the times

You can't really fault Frank though. He was commenting on yet another boondoggle from our beloved Mayor Peter Kelly. How can you keep up with the mishaps of a man who lead HRM's bid on the Commonwealth Games and presided over the cat law fiasco to mention just a couple of his better known disasters. Well Frank announced a new Eau de Toilette called PK one in honour of the smell of His Honour's harbour.. no sooner was his informative periodical on the stands and the Dartmouth system started to let go raising the need for PK Eau de Toilette 2. At the rate the syetems in Halifax are failing (did I say new systems) Mayor Kelly and his council will soon have a complete line of these products out equal to anything Madaonna or anybody else has. Just remember this product may, as Frank warns us, contain solids. What stinks worse then this whole fisaco is the secrecy behind it. Not unlike the HIV and HepC disasters involving the Canadian blood system nobody will ever be called to task for this. Who is responsible? The engineers who designed it? The staff engineer who deemed it acceptable? Mayor Kelly and his Council who voted for it? The company who installed it? You will never know. Unless history takes a 180 deg turn the only thing for sure is that you, the taxpayers of HRM will be paying to fix it or replace it completely if it is, in fact, usless for the size of the job. You can own one of these beautiful T Shirts, Instructions on picture. Let's all get one and wear it to council meeting.

How many by-laws in HRM would die in the Supreme Court?

Following this posting is the context of the Supreme Court decision against the Lindon Ont. City Council. As you can see the court threw out a by-law passed by the council because it was done behind closed doors. Imagine the truck load of stuff they would toss out for the HRM Council.
The Commonwealth games secrecy made Howard Hughs look like an exhibitionist. Mayor Peter Kelly the super secrecy was an agreement between all three levels of government but I have a letter signed by Peter McKay that states there was no secrecy agreement. Who clamped Mayor Kelly's and the Council's collective mouth shut. Better way to put it who is really running the city.
Tax Reform. Done behind closed doors by a selected few. "public Meetings" on it consisted of one night stands with no question and answers just posters and take it there it is.
HRM by design. By the time they got around to talking with the public at large it was already in the oven and cooked.

Here is the article on the London Ont. decision. Read it and ask yourself how many HRM Council acts and by-laws would be tossed out on these grounds. Better yet ask Mayor Kelly why the doors to Council Chambers spend so much time closed and locked against public scrutiny and, it seems , against the law.

In Camera/Out of the Public Eye
June 28th, 2007
by Eric Baum
The Latin term in camera (literally ‘in chambers’) is frequently, if somewhat ambiguously, used within the political context to refer to closed hearings and discussions that take place outside the purview of public scrutiny. Recognizing the value of accountable and transparent government, legislatures across Canada have taken pains to place limits on private, in camera meetings, ensuring citizens the right to watch their governments in action. Such is certainly the case in Ontario, in which municipal council and committee meetings are governed by the Municipal Act, section 239(1) of which creates a general obligation to hold municipal meetings in public.
Recently the Supreme Court of Canada considered London (City) v. RSJ Holdings Inc., a case which helps to clarify the meaning of in camera as well as the contours of local governments’ responsibility to conduct their business openly. The outcome of the case also serves as a stern warning to municipalities across the country.
The Facts
In September of 2003, a group of residents complained to the City regarding the steady increase of university student housing in the Old North neighbourhood of London, located primarily in the area of Richmond Street between Huron and Grosvenor Streets. The City’s Planning Committee responded by resolving to study the issue.
In November, RSJ Holdings Inc., one of London’s largest developers, bought a piece of land on Richmond Street, intending to demolish the existing structure so as to make way for four individual residential units. RSJ applied to the City for all necessary permits and approvals. The City did not immediately respond to RSJ’s application.
In January of 2004 the City considered the question of student housing along the Richmond Street corridor in two closed meetings. During the first of these meetings, held on January 12, the City’s Planning Committee considered a draft interim control by-law that would freeze all development in the Richmond Street area. At the second meeting, held on January 19, the Committee of the Whole made two recommendations. First, they suggested that a land use study be undertaken. Second, that the City Council approve the interim control by-law freezing all development. Upon terminating this second closed meeting, City Council resumed its regular open session, during which 32 by-laws including the one in question were introduced, read and passed without debate or discussion. This public meeting lasted all of eight minutes.
Thus, on January 19, 2004, The City of London passed an interim control by-law creating a one-year freeze on all land development along the Richmond Street corridor between Huron and Grosvenor Streets. RSJ immediately applied for an order quashing the by-law for illegality on the basis that it was discussed and effectively decided at two closed-session meetings, contrary to the City’s statutory obligation under s. 239(1) of the Municipal Act.
Proceedings Below
RSJ’s application was initially dismissed by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on the basis that the closed meetings fell within the exceptions under s. 239(2), particularly s. 239(2)(e), which allows for closed municipal meetings in instances in which litigation or potential litigation is the subject of discussion. The application judge did not feel it necessary to consider the City’s additional argument that the closed meetings also fell under the solicitor-client privilege exemption provided for under s. 239(2)(f).
On appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal, the City adopted the further position that the meeting was squarely authorized under another statute, s. 38 of the Planning Act , activating the exemption under s. 239(2)(g) of the Municipal Act. The Court of Appeal, however, was not swayed by any of the City’s three contentions, particularly that concerning potential litigation, and ruled to set aside the application judge’s decision.
In rendering its decision, the Court of Appeal was particularly concerned that the powerful nature of interim control laws should demand more, not less, transparency and accountability. In the words of Justice of Appeal Labrosse at paras. 22 and 27:
We observe that where the subject matter under consideration is an interim control by-law, it cannot be said that the subject matter under consideration is potential litigation simply because there is a statutory right of appeal by a person affected… The fact that there might be, or even inevitably would be, litigation arising from the interim control by-law does not make the “subject matter under consideration” potential litigation…
By virtue of s. 38(3) of the Planning Act, a municipality need not give prior notice or hold a public hearing before it passes an interim control by-law. However, the meeting in which Council is to consider and vote on the interim control by-law is to be open. In the face of the “draconian” nature of an interim control by-law and the reduction in rights of affected persons by virtue of s. 38(3) of the Planning Act, there is an even greater need that the meeting in which an interim control by-law is discussed be open to the public as required by s. 239(1) of the Act.
At the SCC
At the Supreme Court, the city of London pursued their third line of argumentation, suggesting that under the provisions of the Planning Act an interim control by-law may be passed without prior notice and without a public hearing. The City argued that since s.38 of the Planning Act permits the passing of a by-law in such a fashion, it follows that there was nothing improper with the City’s in camera sessions. Like the Court of Appeal, the SCC, was unconvinced. In the words of Justice Charron, speaking for a unanimous court at para. 44:
The City’s conduct in closing the two meetings in question was neither inadvertent nor trivial. In fact its council meeting of January 19, 2004 was conducted in a manner that is rather reminiscent of the problems reported more than 20 years ago that led to the passing of the statutory open meeting requirement. It is worth repeating the words of the Working Committee quoted earlier: “some municipal councils employ lengthy, in-camera special and committee meetings to discuss matters under debate and then ratify their decision in full council in a few minutes, with minimal discussion”. In my view, the eight-minute public session during the course of which the interim by-law was passed without debate or discussion along with 31 other by-laws did nothing to cure the defect.
Indeed, the SCC concluded that the City of London’s use of in camera sessions simply did not deserve the type of deference normally awarded to governmental decision-making. “When a municipal government improperly acts with secrecy, this undermines the democratic legitimacy of its decision, and such decisions, even when intra vires, are less worthy of deference” (para. 38). If nothing else, the decision serves as a warning to Canadian municipal governments that the democratic legitimacy of government operations does not rest in the electoral process alone, but also from a “decision-making process that is transparent, accessible to the public, and mandated by law” (para. 38).

This is the best you could Mayor Kelly??

Did Mayor Kelly and the rest of his City Hall crowd make the best deal on behalf of the HRM taxpayer for the new convention center? The simple answer is no they should not even be involved in it. The Convention centre was, as it seems to be in other provinces, the responsibility of the Province but seeing Premier Rodney Mac Donald is Hell bent on downloading even more financial burdens onto the HRM ratepayers we must look at the deal HRM council accepted and It seems to be the poorer one as far as the people who will pay for it, us, are concerned.

The Ramia family's business, Rank inc., beat out the Hardman group's bid for the new convention centre but, when you look behind the snappy one liners from City Hall's spin doctors, you have to ask yourself why in my opinion.


I raised this question on the editorial page of the Herald on Saturday and received an E Mail stating no we didn't get the betetr deal with some possible reasons. A bit of digging and some help from Tim Bosquet of the Coast Magazine seems to have quickly confirmed my informant’s suspicions. This deal will leave us with a $1,000,000 bill for the ratepayers to tear down the Cogswell Interchange. What other costs will it add? Only the Mayor Kelly lead council can tell and as usual they aren’t talking. See for yourself and decide for your self at http://tinyurl.com/r9dv6a then use the E Mail addresses at left to tell the Mayor and your councillor what you think about how they are squandering your money.

CONTACT THE PARTY LEADERS

Here is full contact information for the leaders in the current provincial election. I would suggest a FAX.
Here are some issues you may want to have addresses:
1. The new convention centre. In other provinces the publicly owned convention centres are provincially owned like this one was. Now the MacDonald Government want to follow the example set my Premier Savage's Liberals and download the cost of the new centre onto the HRM ratepayer. Ask who, if elected will take over this undertaking from the city and keep it as a provincial responsibility as it has always been.
2. A full public independent audit of the Commonwealth Games Books. It was our money who got the luggage? How did donations turn into leases? We should have a rite to know.
3. Ask if they are prepared, if elected, to force open the doors of HRM council as the law dictates. The people of London Ont. took their council to court and the courts tossed out a by law because it was debated behind closed doors. Everything this council does is behind closed doors with a dog and pony show at the end for the public after everything is decided.

This is one of the few times they may listen to you speak up. Pass this site URL to anybody you know in Nova SCotia but in particular in HRM.

Liberal leader Steven McNeil
PH. 1-902-825-6632
FX. 1-902-825-4956
E Mail annapoliscampaign@NS.aliantzinc.ca

Darrell Dexter
PH. 1-902-423-9127
FX. 1-902-423-9618
E Mail ndpadmin@nsndp.ca

Rodney MacDonald
PH. 1-902-258-2216
FX. 1-902-258-3231
E Mail rodneym@ns.sympatico.ca

Nova Scotia lost 4,100 jobs last month

"Nova Scotia lost 4,100 jobs last month and unemployment rose to 9.2% (up.3%) Stats Can reported today. It was the worst performance in Canada last month."

Money is tight and jobs are vanishing. What are the MacDonald Government and the HRM government doing to offset this?
1. The MacDonald Government has hiked the land assessment for home taxes once again.
2. Jamie Muir hiked user fees across the board.
3. Premier MacDonald has down loaded the cost of the new convention Centre onto the HRM ratepayer.
4. Mayor Kelly and council are happy to go along with this and burden the already drowning ratepayers with more debt and annual subsidizes.
5. Mayor Kelly and some supporters, among them Linda Mosher, continue to push for that big economic black hole the high speed ferry
6. Don't forget the $50,000,000 plus Canada Winter Games. They have been very quiet about that cost since they signed on the dotted line on our behalf.
It seems that the recession and hard times are hitting everywhere except in the rank and file of our public officials and employees. There it's business as usual.

Is HRM council breaking the law?

When I raised the issue about the city's mandate to even have gotten involved in the Commonwealth games I was told by some people involved that they had no mandate.
Along the same line I have been told by members of Municipal governments that if the MGA does not specifically say yes to something in their laws then the city cannot get involved. If something is not specifically OK'd by the MGA then they cannot get involved in it.
There is also the very specific rule that says they are forbidden to put money into any and all "for profit" businesses. They circumvented this law for the Farmer's market and continue to circumvent daily, it seems, by funneling money through the greater Halifax partnership.
Do they have the mandate to get involved in this deal? Does getting involved in this deal go against the law that firbids them putting money into for profit businesses?
Is it time, in fact past time that we, the HRM ratepayers, seek legal council about how this council conducts business.
Bruce DeVenne

Decision time at City Hall

Isn't this about the truth!!!!
This financial crisis is forcing government departments and agencies to make tough decisions, there is a risk that we might need to lay off Andre....

Click on Picture to enlarge

Congrats Sue

Congratulations to HRM Councillor Sue Uteck for speaking out against Kaptain Kelly’s High Speed Bedford to Halifax economic hole in the water. It’s refreshing to finally see some financial responsibility, intelligence and reality come from behind Councils tightly ( and illegally?) closed doors.

If real estate values are down why are assessments and taxes up?

Real estate prices in Nova Scotia are down nationally 8% from last year according to a study done by The Canadian Real Estate Association and Nova Scotia is down around 1% yet our assessments for taxes are up. Would one of the members of City Council or the Cabinet Minister responsible for this act like to explain this?

I can explain it. Regardless of fiscal realities governments take more money annually. On our houses if the provincial people dropped the assessment to truly mirror home values in Nova Scotia HRM council would have boosted the tax rates.

How do we get the message across that enough is enough. Spend the money were mandated and needed.
NO high speed ferries from Bedford to Halifax
NO big tax dollar paid for costly sporting events
NO subsidizing multi millionaire rock bands.

Perhaps its time the tax payer looked at a tax strike even if it's illegal. If enough with hold their taxes the city and the province couldn't do a thing but finally listen between elections.

If you would like to ask the Mayor how this can be or you elected representative on city council E Mail addresses are listed on the right.

TRUE TAX REFORM for your consideration.

HRM's new tax reform is nothing but a tax reshuffle. They will lower taxes on condos and apartment dwellers and are already doing away with the business occupancy tax. To make these short falls up they will look to the home owners. Councillor Russell Walker told us at one meeting that he expects to see home taxes, outside old Halifax, double to triple in cost. Can you afford this. It's time for the city to look at true tax reform, do away with the land value based system and look at an income based system.

This will address all the problems that the civic government says are in the present system such as people losing the family home because it is assessed so high for taxes that they cannot afford it. People who see their income drop as a result of a death of a spouse, retirement, sickness or unemployment. It will also cut down on the number of employees needed at city hall.

Do away with municipal taxes, as we now know them. The only bill you will get from the city is for water and only water usage will be on the bill. This way people who consume or waste water will pay more.

To replace the present system of taxation add ¼ of 1%: or ½ of 1%: or even a full 1% to the income tax form. Ottawa collects it and turns it over to the municipality. When filing tax returns people would list their gross income deduct the personal allowances and pay a percent of the next line. Business would take their gross earnings, deduct T4 amounts and anything paid out to share holders and pay a percentage of that amount.

The pluses.
1. People who have land from their family but don’t have the wealth to pay the present system would pay according to their income and not lose their home.
2. If your income drops for any reason; you’re out of work; retirement; death of a spouse; for any reason you would pay less taxes to the city because your taxes would be directly linked to you earnings.
3. Everybody pays directly no hidden taxes in rents etc. Therefore rents should drop when this is instituted. No condo land taxes on top of owner’s taxes.
4. Somebody with money but living in a modest home would pay according to their ability.
5. Fewer employees at city hall. We pay for a finance department at all three levels of government so they can tax us and collect the taxes. This triple service cost can be stopped with this system.
6. Business would contribute according to their income. Nobody would be left out.
7. The city would not have to take drastic action such as selling a persons house or forcing them to sell it. Ottawa has the power to garnishee wages at the source.
8. We would not need an assessment department in city hall or to pay the province for doing assessments.

There may be some wrinkles that have to be ironed out but as a basis for true tax reform I feel that this addresses and offers solutions to the problems in the present system as well as lowering operating costs for the city.

Who sets the budgets?

Annually, somewhere in January, we'll see a news story telling us the snow clearing money is almost all or entirely gone and the city must dip into emergency funds. Who is responsible for making up this perpetually short budget? It's evident that he she is totally incapable of doing their job so let's replace them with somebody competent in this field.



Better yet find the person who sets the budgets for money to chase Fred MacGilliavry's economic nightmares and to pay for council's junkets, they never seem to have any problem with budgeted available funds and switch these two people around. That way there will be no shortages for the necessary things like snow removal, pot hole fixing and policing and if, when the news story says that there is a shortage of funds for a third of the council to take a junket somewhere of for Fred MacGilliavry or his successor to get involved in some fly by night scheme, so what? Tough bananas, at least the needed things are looked after.

Monday: Who does (or doesn't) do the bydget work in city hall?

This weeks Lipstick on a Pig award goes to Finance Minister Jamie Muir

This week we are awarding two Lipstick on a pig awards and they both go to our beloved provincial Finance Minister Jamie Muir. The first is for his statement that, after he apparently broke the law by giving money intended to pay down the debt to universities,he would change the law in the future. If anybody else broke the law he or she would be in court. Why aren't the police looking for Mr. Muir with handcuffs. We are all equal but it seems some are more equal than others.
Second award for his stirring speech telling us how fees had to go up to match the 3% inflation. Correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Muir but we pay fees daily almost hourly in one form of taxation or another in this province. What are the taxes for if not to supply these services. It seems that the Nova Scotia government has hit bureaucratic Nirvana where all the money that comes in pays for the layers of civil servants and we have to pay every time we use the system. Proof that a monopoly leads to gouging and high costs.
You can plan to change the law but it still stands that you've broken the law Jamie and you can claim higher fees are needed but we pay are taxed white daily to pay for them. You're putting lipstick on two pigs trying to make them look better but they are still two pigs.
Congratulations to Jamie Muir this weeks winner of two lipstick on a pig awards.

Check Friday to see who gets this week's lipstick on a pig award

The 2014 Commonwealth Games Committee

First what were they? In reality they were a government organization. They were financed almost 100% by the three levels of governments. They came into being at the request of HRM, reported to HRM and needed HRM’s approval to continue. As well HRM was the only signatory backing and guaranteeing the deal. They can be considered nothing else but an agency of the HRM council. Therefore they are a government agency and should be open to full public. scrutiny.

We were told that they had $450,000 in donations from private companies. This was not true the donations were, for the most part, “in kind” services, facilities, office furniture and other such needed items either donated or given for use at reduced costs. Even this vanished later on as I will show. Despite the fact that those in the know knew these donations were not actual cash Mayor Kelly told me, when he was on the Hot Line Show, that this money would pay for the 27 person junket to Melbourne. He was wrong on two counts the junket cost more than this ($733,000) and there was never $450,000 in cash to start with so who paid for this junket?

Suddenly when the plug was finally pulled on this financial black hole the “in kind” donations did a vanishing act. The people involved said oops they were supposed to be full price and or leased and, in many cases, the same people who profited from this error were directly involved with the board who said, that’s OK well just write you checks to cover it all and drain every cent from the bid coffers.

Documents were finally turned over to the Coast Magazine but names on checks were removed. Who got paid what? Were any of the numerous Civil and Municipal employees double dipping? Drawing their salary and a salary from the games coffers? What about tax fraud? Did they claim these donations, that were not donations, on their tax returns?

Again, many of those who profited were members of that very committee as were many who profited when the in kind donation rule was changed. The examples of conflict of interest are rampant throughout this deal from start to finish.

Money went from the bid committee’s coffers to at least three of the civic organizations Fred MacGillivary was involved in yet, despite that we has one of the head men in each section, he says knows nothing about it.

Again, private business would never be allowed to operate like this therefore neither the 2014 Commonwealth Games Committee. I would like to see a full independent audit done on the 2014 Commonwealth Games Bid Committee’s books and all the results made public and charges of fraud or misappropriation of funds charges laid if and where warranted.

To see even more questionable spending read the full article from the Coast by Tim Bousquet at http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/Home

Let's get council's doors open and get some answers. It's our money they are spending

The accepted way of doing business in HRM government is to run as close as possible to total secrecy. Meetings are held behind closed doors. When they open the doors they read off lists of things settled earlier in camera then vote on them calling for questions with time limits on them.

The people of London Ontario took their council to court and the Supreme Court quashed a by-law they had passed because it was debated behind closed doors and only voted on in public. Sounds like 99% of HRM’s council’s work doesn’t it?

One of the better examples of this was the Commonwealth Games. Millions were spent and, even now, we don’t know where. Mayor Kelly told me on the Hot Line Show that there was a secrecy deal between the three levels of government. I wrote the Federal Minister and have his letter saying no such deal was in place.

Again Mayor Kelly promised (two or three times)to produce a tax dollar paid for feasibility study done on hosting the games but never produced it. From what I was told "people" (or one person?) on the games committee did not want it published. Makes you wonder who is really running the city doesn't it?

The tax reform deal was all presented to us as a done deal. Council made a big deal about the public hearings (after the fact) but these were the ultimate dog and pony show. No questions and answers allowed for. It was a typical HRM read what we wrote deal.

On Wednesday I am going to look at some of the many unanswered questions from the Commonwealth Games. I know I can members of the games committee and HRM council saying, “here we go again” or “it’s over let it die”. Why? Why can’t we get answers on where OUR money went? Is there a problem with who may get caught with his or her hand in the cookie jar?

Perhaps it's time (or even well past the time) for the taxpayers of HRM to take the City Council into court to force open the doors of council chambers like they did in London Ontario.

Mayor Kelly a bipedal oxymoron??

As we all know an oxymoron is a term that contradicts itself such As Jumbo Shrimp or, as they say in M*A*S*H, Army intelligence.

Bipedal means two footed so let’s look at out civic leader. It’s evident that he only has two feet so the bipedal description is OK. In order to decide if the oxymoron tag fits let’s look at his past record.

This is the man who, as Councilor Kelly, objected so strongly to the excessive cost of new chairs for the council members that he very theatrically (and some say childishly) dragged his old chair into chambers refusing to sit in the new more costly one.

When John Savage shoved the horrendous costs of forced amalgamation down our throats (about the same time as the blended sales tax that cost Nova Scotians about a billion annually and the toll highway on the way to Amherst) Councillor Kelly was on a perpetual rant about the secrecy of Council meetings complaining that the chambers should be open to the public more than they were.

Councillor Kelly rode these twin concerns, needless costs and secrecy to the Mayor’s chair now let’s take a look at the changes he bought with him.

He now seems to be the person who hold’s the tax vault doors open while Fred MacGilliavry (retired) and his ilk raid the coffers to shower themselves in glory or make money for the downtown bars at the cost of the HRM taxpayer. His high-speed ferry is just one of his high cost low efficiency and debt laden ideas. Nothing seems too far-fetched or too costly to him now.

As far as closed door meetings and secrecy goes Mayor Kelly unlike Councillor Kelly not only sees nothing wrong with it but has increased that aspect of Council to the point that he makes all past Mayors and even Howard Hughes look like exhibitionists.

What happened to fiscally conservative, Peter Kelly who championed more open civic government? Was he taken over by some sort of science fiction monster from outer space?
Perhaps Mayor Kelly could take a few minutes and tell us where Councilor Kelly vanished to.

When everybody thinks alike then nobody us thinking

.
I read this line in a book last week and it struck me how well it applies to government. In Provincial and Federal government where agreement with the party is sacred law for all intents and purposes. You vote the party line in a sheep-like manner no matter what the cost to the people who elected you to represent their interests or else. If not it's good-bye Charlie or Bill Casey whichever the case may be. Recently Cuba's Castro kicked two people out of their government positions for speaking out against some of his policies the same as Harper did to Casey. This tends to lend credence to the statement that we are living in an elected dictatorship.

It also seems to be well embedded in Municipal politics as well. You only have to look at the string of unanimous votes supporting the Commonwealth games despite all the evidence showing them to be an economic black hole.

The first question here is what do we elect people for. Do we send them to look out for our interests and well being of for the party's, big business and their friends interests? The second question is how do we get them to change the system and look after the people who sent them to the Legislature: Parliament or City Hall instead of the party's interests, business and their friends.

Trip to Whistler! Work or Junket?

Pulp and paper mill closes, call center closes and workers hours cut back. These are not fairy tales, they are headlines from Nova Scotia and HRM in the past week or so yet, while the working class watch jobs vanish, wages being cut while personal bankruptcies and home foreclosures rise in Canada our elected officials seem content to keep spending as usual, particularly where they themselves are concerned. The trip to BC by eight members of council is a prime example. If it is necessary, and personally I doubt it, send at most two people and they can brief the council when they return.

Personally I love the excuses (note excuses not reasons) for going on these junkets.

Councilor Walker says, "He is particularly interested in touring Whistler’s waste treatment facility". A bit late for that Russell unless you’re planning on buying a treatment system to handle the over flow from the treatment system you just bought.
Councillor Walker again! This time Russell tells us how we learned about the count down walk lights during a junket to Montreal. Russell how did Montreal learn about them? I find it hard to believe that our well-paid traffic engineers weren’t told about this innovation by the sales reps from the companies involved.

Councilor Sloane says, " She will also review Whistler’s security plans for the Winter Olympics, some of which she hopes will be relevant to Halifax’s hosting of the Canada Winter Games in 2011". I doubt if any terrorist group is even aware of these games Dawn.

Sheila Fougere tells she learned, at on earlier junket that establishing a 311 telephone system for municipal inquiries was not viable because we already had a "better working system here,” Too bad she didn’t impart this information to Councillor Linda Mosher who was recently pushing to have a 311 system implemented as soon as possible.
Do these people even talk to each other?

As for the money that the city will get in 2011 when the conference is here, the city will get next to nothing. The province and downtown merchants will profit. How much have we spent of trips so far to these junkets to get the one in 2011 and what will be the unrecoverable cost to the HRM taxpayer to host the 2011 event. The cost will not be offset by the income.

This is a very good example of putting lipstick on a pig. It may look better but it’s still a pig so the Gazette’s Lipstick on a Pig Award goes to the members of council traveling to Whistler and the other members of council who seem to accept this as OK.

Our fiscally responsible award goes to Gloria McCluskey for speaking out against it and calling it what it is…a waste of tax dollars.

If you are tired of the entitled few being entitled to their entitlements while the rest of us have to make do call the mayor at 490-4010 or contact the mayor and/or your councilor by using the index on the left of the screen.

THE GREATER HALIFAX PARTNERSHIP. WHY?

If you look at exactly what the Greater Halifax Partnership does, or claims to do, they appear to be duplication, triplication or (with apologies to me grammar teachers) a fourplication of services that already exist in the federal and provincial governments as well as in the private sectors.One big difference is they appear to be in the high-risk loan business.

They are listed as an unsecured creditor for Nova Scotia Glass to the tune of $17,645.05 in issue # 552 of Frank Magazine. This is all fine and well except for one slight problem? Where are they getting the money they are passing out? They are not a bank, finance company, trust company or credit union. Where does the money come from?If you look in the minutes of HRM council around budget time you will see that HRM council votes this company over a million dollars of HRM tax dollars annually to operate.

How many municipal tax dollars are funneled through this organization into local businesses? How much in high risk loans? How much in grants? The city council is forbidden by law to put money into for profit companies. Could this be simply a front to skirt this law? Where else does the partnership get it’s financing?

If it is a viable and needed business why does it need over a million dollars annually to run? In difficult economic times (or even in good times) this set up seems to be one big waste of HRM tax dollars, tax dollars that could be used to clear snow, repair roads or any on the numerous tasks HRM council is mandated to do but are always falling short on.Its time that government at all levels took a hard look at where our tax dollars are being spent with an eye to cutting costs and this seems, to me, to be one of the better places if not the best place to start in with the tax saving axe.
I guess the bottom line question here is just who is on the hook for this money, The Greater Halifax partnership as a private business like a bank or us the HRM taxpayers.

Bruce DeVenne

CAPTAIN KELLY'S HIGH SPEED FERRY

Somebody once said a boat is a hole in the water into which you pour money. Why then is HRM council prepared to annually pour millions of our hard earned tax dollars into a high speed ferry from Bedford (the Mayor's home port) and Halifax? Councillor David Hendsbee, on the now defunct and greatly missed Rick Howe Hot Line Show, told me that people would come from Sackville, Upper Sackville, Beaverback and Mount Uniack to use this service.
I ask you to think about this for a minute. Who is going to get off a 100 KPM highway that takes them easily and quickly into work to get on the 50 KPH Hammonds plains road so they can park, wait for a shuttle service, take that to the ferry and pay $15.00 for a trip that will see them taking one or more buses to get to where they are going in Halifax then do it all in reverse after work? Very few that I can think of.
For what this ferry service will cost we could put a couple of dozen new buses on the road. Buses that could go where needed not in a straight line from point A to point B and back again. It's time this council started spending our tax dollars intelligently supplying needed services not pipe dreams.
If you are tired of seeing your money wasted on grandiose ideas like the Commonwealth Games and high speed ferries speak up. You can contact the Mayor and your councillor by using the index on the left.
Bruce DeVenne