“Getting good value for money [for taxpayers] is our number one priority.”

When Abbotsford’s city council is looking for an excuse to do something it wants (close Matsqui pool, leave the FVRD) council is all about saving or getting value for taxpayer’s money BUT when it is an expensive boondoggle they want to squander taxpayer’s money on (buy wealthy, well-connected businessmen a professional hockey team, provide multi-million dollar operating subsidies for an arena for the team to play in, build an (practically) unused $1.4+ million dollar scraggly garden) value for money or saving taxpayers money is not a consideration.

Given the mayor and councillors comments on leaving the FVRD and their decisions over recent years that led up to this year’s decision to close Matsqui pool, one is led to suspect they don’t have a solid grasp of the concept of value. Whether that is true or not, it is clear from councils decisions on Matsqui pool that council’s concept of value is quite different from that of the taxpayers of Abbotsford.

Value is not strictly a dollars in equals a dollars out thing. One of the reasons for being in the FVRD is to stay out of the clutches of Translink and its gas and parking stall taxes. I suspect most taxpayers would consider this a very valuable benefit of FVRD membership. There are numerous other ‘values’ I can think of that Abbotsford receives for being a member of the FVRD, not the least of which is good relations with the neighbours.

But the real reason that wise municipal politicians do not want to open the can of worms that comes with dollars in must equal dollars out is that, while at a municipal property tax level the rural areas (and smaller communities) put in less dollars that the larger municipalities, at provincial and federal tax levels the rural (and smaller communities) put in far more dollars than they receive back – dollars that flow to the larger municipalities.

Following councils dollars in must equal dollars out philosophy you would end up with decisions that, while typical of Abbotsford councils decision making, are not astute, wise or necessarily rational.

Under dollars in equal dollars out our new REGIONAL hospital could have been built in Yarrow because it is far easier to balance dollars in with dollars out using large cost projects.

Or a more likely scenario is the hospital gets built in Abbotsford but the city gets no federal or provincial dollars for the new highway interchanges or other projects until it has put enough dollars in to get any dollars out. Although given the interchanges Abbotsford ended up with……not having money from the province and federal governments to build the new interchanges and being left with the old interchanges may not have been a bad thing.

Be that as it may, the funding mayhem that would arise from following councils dollars in must equal dollars out philosophy is why politicians with any common sense wisely avoid opening the can of worms that comes with dollars in must equal dollars out.

That is the problem with focusing on narrow wants – you fail to see the overarching reality. Like a mouse focused on the cheese you miss the presence of the trap until it delivers a painful, or fatal, reminder of its presence.

And while there is nothing wrong with the municipalities in the FVRD wanting their taxpayers money spent wisely and efficiently, it is highly ironic – nay, the height of hypocrisy – for Abbotsford’s council to be complaining about the way Abbotsford taxpayer dollars are being spent by the FVRD in light of their profligate spending of Abbotsford taxpayer’s dollars.

On January 24th 2011 Abbotsford council closed Matsqui Pool.. On February 7th 2011 the mayor and councillors give themselves a large raise, benefits and perks as well as an Never-ending stream of yearly pay raises. Perhaps explaining council’s desperate need to save thousands of dollars by closing Matsqui Pool.

As to the question of whether council deserved a raise – the closing of Matsqui Pool, and the history of that closing, provide clear evidence that mayor and council did not deserved one single cent of an increase.

Mayor and council are suppose to be stewards of the City of Abbotsford’s finances and assets, not vandals.

For years council and management of Parks and Recreation have wanted, indeed have tried repeatedly, to close Matsqui Pool.

Just as an aside: Have you noticed that when council and Parks and Rec management want to build something (an arena or a museum/gallery) they are all about comparisons to other cities BUT when council and management wanted to close Matsqui pool there was no comparison to other communities; a comparison that would highlight Abbotsford’s severe shortage of public pool space?

Council claims it would cost too much to repair Matsqui pool and they cannot afford the $70,000 annual operating costs – yet council has $500,000 (or more) for yearly subsidies to purchase of a profession al hockey team for wealthy Abbotsford citizens; $600,000+ to subsidize the Museum/Art Gallery; multi-millions of dollars to subsidize the operation of the arena for the Heat to play in.

And council has $250,000 to demolish the pool.

I do not want to get mired down in an argument about whether the city’s estimate of $1 – 2 million to repair the pool is accurate (but given city management and council’s record of grossly underestimating the costs for projects they wish to do and exaggerating the costs of projects or things they don’t want to do……) or whether competent management could accomplish this task for considerably less. Nor mired down in the fact that when a neighbour of mine had a leak in his pool tank he had no problem finding and repairing the leak. But then he was a competent individual who hired competent help to find (and repair) the leak.

No the real point is that the current decrepit state Matsqui Pool is the result of the failure to perform prudent and needed maintenance. A failure council and management will no doubt claim had nothing to do with their desire to close Matsqui Pool.

Which makes it clear that 1) “Getting good value for money [for taxpayers] is our number one priority.” is of concern only where it can be used to justify taking an action council wishes to take (leaving the FVRD) and 2) that council is quite content destroying value if that will justify taking an action (closing Matsqui Pool) council wishes to take.

That council’s decisions and failure to act as a steward of a valuable and treasured taxpayer asset brought Matsqui Pool to its current state of disrepair evidences not only that 1) council should not have gotten a raise, but that 2) a garnishee of council wages was in order. Oh, and 3) Mark Taylor should be fired before he can inflict further damage to taxpayer’s parks and recreation assets.

With Abbotsford City Hall’s unsurpassed record of spend, spend, spend taxpayer’s dollars, it came as no surprise that council voted itself an unending, unlimited stream of yearly raises.

Neither should any Abbotsford taxpayer have been surprised that city manager Frank Pizzuto presented a staff report that recommended the increase since management and council have a very cozy, incestuous, salary relationship.

Council gives management yearly raises – and bonuses – is anyone surprised management recommends council give itself a raise? Or that it was recommended council get a yearly salary raise? Or that council promptly gave itself this limitless pay raise?

To add insult to the injury done to taxpayers tax bills by this never-ending, no limits pay raise, council and management started throwing around Abbotsford City Hall Math in regards to the pay raise.

[Abbotsford City Hall Math: City hall calculates a profit for taxpayers and the reality turns out to be multi-million dollar yearly losses that taxpayers must cover.]

Abbotsford City Hall Math:

The mayor’s increases work out to an average of 1.8 per cent a year, for the past five years, while councillors would get an average of 1.4 per cent a year over the same period of time.

Reality:

Other than the fact that dividing the raise by 5 makes it seem much smaller – what does the past 5 years have to do with this pay raise?
Perhaps council is seeking to have taxpayers forget that council enriched itself over the past three years with the 44% pay increase they gave themselves just three years ago?

A 44% raise that after receiving, council quickly cut the number of council meetings in half.

But then council, city management and Tim Dillon and Associates were very careful to just compare what surrounding councils were paid – and not what value taxpayers in those municipalities received for the wages they paid their councils.

Hardly surprising since even the most cursory comparison between what the taxpayers of Langley paid for their Sports and Entertainment Centre (and received for their investment) and what the taxpayers of Abbotsford paid, and continue to pay, (and received for their $$$$) would inevitably lead any independent party to the conclusion that 1) council does not deserve a 9% (mayor – 7% council) raise and 2) the taxpayers of Abbotsford are entitled to a refund, a BIG refund.

Instead, council will receive yearly raises in an amount which is unknown and on which there is no cap to limit the size of the raise in any given year.
Raises that will continue to have no relationship to the manner in which council fumbles its responsibilities.

Council gets the $$$$$$$$ and taxpayers – as usual – get the shaft, footing the bills for councils profligate ways.

So, council paid Tim Dillon & Associates $9,000 to provide justification for giving themselves (council) yet another pay raise? A raise that is to include health benefits, a yearly allowance for attending community events and an annual conference allowance?

With all the council promises and decisions that have turned in black holes sucking millions of dollars out of the city budget, infrastructure (e.g. Matsqui Pool) that is falling apart, the city mired in a financial quagmire, the need for water rationing (in one of the wettest years on record) in order to have water for the Fire Department to use…….how could anyone, even Abbotsford’s council, possibly think a raise is either deserved or in order?

What’s next? A golden retirement plan like the ones provincial and federal politicians have gifted themselves?

Perhaps the most offensive aspect of this pay raise proposal is to increase the mayor and city council’s wages every year – forever – without the politicians every having to face the taxpayers and publically vote to push their personal hands deeper into taxpayers pockets. If council has its way raises will happen quietly, behind the closed doors of City Hall, without any need to bother taxpayers with the knowledge that council has gotten yet another automatic yearly raise – unearned and undeserved or not.

So much for Mayor Peary’s “Getting good value for money [for taxpayers] is our number one priority.”

And while I include council’s current salaries as well as the proposed salary raises and perks in stating that taxpayers are not getting value for the wages they currently pay council – I do not include the $9000 paid to Tim Dillon & Associates in this lack of value.

Not that I don’t consider the $9000 paid to Tim Dillon & Associates to permit council to squander yet more taxpayer dollars – in this instance directly stuffing taxpayer dollars into council’s personal pockets – a misuse of city funds.

It is just that $9000 seems a fairly cheap price, perhaps even a bargain, when you contrast the outcome, the proposed 9% pay raise, with the nearly 50% pay raise council arrived at, and gave themselves, on their own 3 years ago.

“Getting good value for money [for taxpayers] is our number one priority.”

Laughable.

If there was any relationship between ‘value for money’ and the wages paid to Abbotsford’s current council, taxpayers would be getting an extremely large refund of the wages city council has paid itself.

Instead council is going to give itself ongoing yearly salary increases, benefits and perks. Business as usual – council (or friends) get the mine and taxpayers get the shaft.

““I’m not sure it’s fair to deny this [4633 Sumas Mountain Road] development,” she [Councillor Lynne Harris] said.”

It seems extremely fair to me to withhold council’s rubberstamping of another development on Sumas Mountain until the study on the effects previous developments had on property downhill and downstream is available.

If we are speaking of lack of fairness it seems extremely unfair to: 1) be making this decision without waiting for the IMSP study that would show whether development has negatively impacted property downhill and downstream; 2) that council in prior years routinely rubberstamped developments without studying what effect development had on property downhill and downstream; 3) to sneak the matter back before council for approval after deferring the decision on the development at a meeting attended by those who own property downhill and downstream; 4) to hold a re-vote when one of those who originally voted on the matter wasn’t present – especially given that councillor voted to wait for the report on the effect development has had.

Or perhaps Councillor Harris meant it was not fair to the developer not to rubberstamp (business as usual) the development but to use evidence (the ISMP study) in making the decision on whether to approve the development. Or perhaps Councillor Harris meant it was not fair to put the interests of Abbotsford’s citizens and area residents ahead of the interests of the developer?

“Councillor Lynne Harris said after “serious reflection” away from the “emotion of the table,” she had changed her mind.” So Councillor Harris was unwilling to stand up and face Abbotsford citizens whose property will be negatively impacted by the development in a forthright manner and vote to approve the development, but is quite willing to slither into a council meeting where she would not be facing those whose property will be negatively impacted by the development and sell out the interests of those citizens ?

There are several words that describe the behaviour of Councillor (Et tu) Harris vis-à-vis this development, but there was nothing fair in her betrayal of the residents of the properties downhill and down stream.

In addressing his guileful return before council of the development on Sumas Mountain Mayor Peary attempted to use doublespeak (language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses meaning) to hide the fact that he was once again placing the interests of developers ahead of the interests of the citizens of Abbotsford (notably those property owners who will be negatively impacted by the development).
For example: ” Peary said he only has 30 days to ask for a reconsideration and had he waited for the next meeting, it would have been too late.”

To late for what?

To take advantage of the absence of Councillor Ross who was not a supporter of approving the development before the ISMP study was complete?

To have the development approved before the ISMP study provided evidence to support the position of property owners downhill and downstream that development on the mountain has negative effects upon them and their property is available?

Why else the rush to decision? As Mayor Peary himself acknowledged when he stated “We would just be reconsidering it in February…”, the decision was due for reconsideration next month (February) – hardly an unreasonable delay.

Or for example: “Peary told The News that the watershed is 1,500 hectares in size, and the 65-unit townhouse development is “a tiny dot” on it.”

What does the size of the watershed have to do with anything? The important point is that “tiny dot” that is the 65-unit townhouse development is right above the “tiny dots” that are the properties of Abbotsford citizens.

How about: ” What’s more, he [Mayor Peary] said city staff assure him that water detention requirements in the development will mean there will be less runoff from the developed land.”

Would this be the same staff who assured citizens the Abbotsford Entertainment and Sports Complex would make a profit and not be a black hole consuming millions of taxpayers dollars?

“… less runoff from the developed land.” Less runoff than what? The floods currently hitting Australia? What is a little more flooding, eh Mayor Peary? Given his drive to have the development approved at any cost the mayor would not want to remember that just a few years ago a “little more flood” would have had the Fraser River breeching its dikes and pouring into Abbotsford.

Contrast Mayor Peary’s doublespeak with the words of Councillor MacGregor who demonstrated a clear grasp of the situation when he stated ““We need to see this report. … we need to wait.””

I would suggest that Mayor Peary needs to remember that his duty of care is owed to the citizens of Abbotsford and not to developers, or wealthy citizens purchasing a professional hockey team, et cetera. But…… given the mayor’s behaviour since he took office and the manner in which he snuck this matter back before council when the timing would ensure that the development was approved – reminding the mayor of the duty of care he owes Abbotsford’s citizens would be a waste of breath.