City Hall Pushes On With Mega Plan

I cannot believe that the City of Rossland still proposes to proceed with their four story mega plan for the new city hall 'plus' in view of the current situation https://www.trail-times.ca/news/new-city-hall-four-storey-development-proposed-for-rossland/ .

It is only fair to say I thought it was a poorly thought out plan before the current crisis. But now it is very foolish and dangerous. Our country stands on the brink of a severe recession, quite likely even a depression. We have no idea of when or if tourism will return to our town, or whether we'll even want it to. We have gone from a situation where local businesses couldn't get workers to a situation where workers can't get jobs. Many local businesses are hanging on by their fingernails. We do not need, and cannot afford this plan.

Re-locate to the City hall that we have paid for and insured. Down-size, tighten your belt. Unfortunately, this is going to get ugly. We do not need proposals like this at this time!

I agree that this is neither the time nor the place to be carrying through with such an extreme plan

Wow. I already had my doubts about this project before. But I agree with Mountain Mitch and Charity that this is not a good idea especially now. Here are a couple quotes from the Trolley Problem thread by Mayor Kathy herself...

"The economy is going to take an unimaginably huge hit and we are going to have to pick up the pieces, innovate and learn to do things differently. Governments will have to act differently too.

 

I guess my point is that we are in a terrible situation, with no good options. Everywhere you look requires sacrifice and changes to our behavior on so many levels. All the choices are hard so the best option is that we have to spread the pain around- stay home, take a hit economicially..."

 

So...Kathy, in light of your sentiments quoted above, how will you continue to justify this project with what you said about "governments will have to act differently" and "sacrifice" and "take a hit economically..." ?

WTF?!? Nows not the time for this. Sure this isn't meant as a late April Fools joke??

definitely not the time based economic projections. its being anticipated at all levels that sacrifices will occur once the dust settles. 

Perhaps this should be decided by referendum. 

I would guess its a case of not wanting to miss the boat on all the grants that the government has approved for use by the city on this build. The chance of that kind of money being available again anytime soon seems very slim. I cant remember where I saw it but I thought I read that most of the money required for the build wasnt to come out of our pockets?

 

the beautiful part about this is that we have an election coming up!

if you disapprove of this project, get elected to council and as the kids say, " be the change you wish to see in this world" .

or, make a tic toc video about it and influence the youth that way!

Howdy folks- ok, there has been a lot of commentary on the development permit for the emcon lot and requests for a referendum. Here is a really long response that I posted on my mayor's page on Fb and Rossland Talks. Please check it out. The Development Permit will be discussed on Monday, look at the city's website to see how you can participate, but please, before you do, become informed on the project by reading the material that has been shared with the public. 

Thanks for contacting Council with your concerns about the development permit for the Mid-town mixed use project on the old Emcon lot. I am happy to take the opportunity to better express Council’s position with this proposed project.

Some places have direct democracy where lots of decisions are put directly to the voters via a referendum. Switzerland is the one that comes to mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Switzerland Most democracies, like ours, are representative democracies which, just as it sounds, means that the voters elect representatives who then make decisions on their behalf. The voters’ job is to pay attention to who is running and vote for the one that most aligns with their views.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy

The task that Council faces on Monday night, is to review the design of the proposed building, and ensure that it meets the City’s design guidelines for form and character. It is an incremental step towards construction, but no guarantee that construction will happen. There are many more incremental steps to be taken before that happens. If the proposed schedule were to be maintained, and that is a big IF, we hope to tender the project in the summer and start construction in the fall. 

In Rossland I believe people who run for Council genuinely want to do what’s best for the community. They recognize that it takes a lot of time and work, but they are willing to dedicate the hours and effort necessary to do all the reading, ask questions and do additional research (if necessary) to fully understand the issues and make sound decisions. Council members have diverse views, and after robust discussion, we are satisfied that the proposed Mid Town project is both advantageous and suitable for both Rossland’s current and future community members and needs.

Over the last few years Council has worked exceedingly hard to get the right, smart, knowledgeable and ethical staff in place to help us. I am very proud of the choices we have made. I believe the staff at city hall is the best it’s ever been. At least for the last 20 years since I’ve been in town- but I digress. They have provided us with a lot of really good information and reports about this proposed project.

Generally, this representative democracy system works pretty well because most people are not that interested in doing all the work that is required to fully understand the issues. They have other things to do that are more important to them- their job, their families, their activities- they are, for the most part, happy to let Council make the decisions. I don’t expect everyone to spend as much time on council decisions as Council does. It’s not realistic; people have busy lives. That makes a lot of sense. Just look at our annual financial planning public meetings- pretty much no one shows up or gives us much input on how we are spending millions of tax dollars every year. We have tried in a number of ways to increase the involvement of the public and give them easy ways to learn about our services and costs. We’ve held public meetings each year, we did a Thoughtexchange a few years back, our CFO creates really good reports and important things get mentioned in the monthly Council newsletter. This year when we did the Citizen Budget, (which we have done on 2 years, in an effort to get more people engaged), we only got 114 people to participate and that was primarily due to councillors standing in Ferraro’s handing out slips of paper with the website and begging people to participate. We have over 2800 on our electoral rolls. I wanted more people, but I was happy that we got 114. The results were interesting but not statistically significant. Even so, it was gratifying because of those who participated, the ones who were engaged and interested enough to respond, the vast majority were pretty happy with how we were allocating their tax dollars. One possible take-away is that most people are sufficiently satisfied that they did not see the need to participate. You can see those results in this week’s agenda, btw.

We will continue to try to engage the public in the budget and big projects and hope that we get more people not only involved, but informed as well. It’s very hard to reach people but we do our best; we put notices in the Rossland News, things are regularly and thoroughly reported in the Rossland Telegraph, I do regular interviews on the radio, we send out notices to everyone on our email list, we send out a monthly newsletter, I post on my mayors fb page and Rossland Talks fb page and Rossland Community Discussions page. The City has a twitter feed (though I have to say, I’m not a twitter person so I’ve never seen it). At some point, citizens need to take responsibility for being informed. The “I didn’t know” argument is a frustrating one for me because I am just not sure what else the City can do. I feel like we have led the horse to water, but we can’t make him/her drink. I’m open to ideas! I’ve found over the 12 years of being involved in local government, for the most part, the more people know and understand about the decisions Council makes, the less they complain.

Now we come to the Mid-town mixed use project: We’ve been talking about it for several years. It’s been in the press, it’s been in Council newsletters, it’s been on the radio, we’ve had two open houses, we had a survey, it’s been on the agenda for public hearings providing people the opportunity to speak, (like at the recent rezoning), we’ve sent out info, we’ve had a dedicated spot on our website where people could go to learn about the project, people can always call or email. There have been a multitude of opportunities for people to learn about it. Many people have expressed their views, some for, some against. I’ve found that most of the people who have taken the time to learn about it end up seeing the merits and revise their opinion about the project. Lots of good info here:
http://www.rossland.ca/midtown-mixed-use-development

Legislatively we are not required to hold a referendum unless we are borrowing money. That is not the plan for this project. We intend to pay for our portion of it by selling surplus land and using a variety of capital reserves. This strategy still leaves us in a healthy financial situation that does not require any reduction in service levels or postponement/cancellation of any other projects. (Again, see the info provided)

We have a robust asset management plan in place, so we understand our future needs. If you read the information we put out in early March, it makes an excellent case for why the combined housing and city hall project makes the most sense, financially and for the community. The problem is that report is 27 pages long and I‘m concerned that a majority of the referendum voting public would not read it, much less any of the other material that we have posted and considered. Council has read it all and have given it serious consideration. http://www.rossland.ca/…/city-hall_public-notice_midtown-mi…

Of course, we are concerned about what is happening in the world right now for sure. We have done what we can to protect Rossland. We have closed everything, cancelled all events, gone to split shifts so our essential services are less likely to be suffer an interruption, we have put up signs, we have changed our operations and shared notices about the changes, we have communicated and supported any Provincial orders, we have supported the food bank and reached out to Ferraros about their social distancing measures. 

I am on a weekly mayors’ call with the Ministers responsible for local government and safety. I am regularly in touch with the mayors of other resort municipalities (there are 14 of us in the Prov) I am on zoom calls that include our local Chamber, Community Futures, our local economic development office (LCIC) and business folks in the area. 

We have an easy-to-access spot on our website where all of our notices are posted and references to other resources can be found. At this council meeting, in addition to the Development Permit, we will be looking at what sort of relief is available for us to provide. As a municipal government our powers are limited- for instance we can waive penalties and the amount of taxes, but we can’t change the date taxes are due. The Provincial and Federal governments are providing relief packages for individuals and businesses. There are links to government resources on our website. The Province has declared a Provincial Emergency and their powers supersede ours. That said, the business of the city must carry on. We provide essential services to our community and we are confident that we will continue to do so as we come out the other side of this pandemic.

To that end, we are trying to keep on schedule with all of our work and projects. We are not rushing anything we are just carrying on with the things that are within our power to continue to do that move the community forward. There are still many obstacles ahead that could stop this project, but the development permit shouldn’t be one of them because we have not heard any insurmountable objections up to this point. We hear and listen to all community voices that are both for, and against, this proposed project. 

I fully understand that there are some neighbours who are unhappy because they will be looking at a large building instead of an empty lot or they are unhappy because there will be more traffic in their neighbourhood. While I have sympathy for them, more than they think I’m sure, these are the sorts of concerns we get with just about every project that happens, big or small. Many people are uncomfortable with change and they naturally are looking at it from their own point of view. That is completely understandable. 

Council is charged with looking at projects in a more holistic way. Consideration of this project as to how it will benefit current and future taxpayers is good public policy, and it helps our community grow and develop and continue to thrive. What are the overall benefits to the community? Who will benefit, who will be disadvantaged? There are a lot of compelling points to dispel the financial concerns expressed too. This project will provide a lot of benefits, I won’t go into them here because they are all well-articulated in the info I linked above.

Now, I mentioned showstopper arguments. There are some: One of the beauties of this project, but also a risk, is the interconnectedness of all partners. The partners are the City, BC Housing, CBT and the Lower Columbia Affordable Housing Society. We are all completely dependent on each other to move forward. If any of the partners pulled out or reduced their financial commitment, the project would come to a screeching halt.That means if the City were to pull out, the housing portion would stop too. If the Provincial government or CBT were to reallocate funding from this project to provide assistance elsewhere, or if Lower Columbia Affordable Housing Society was unable to secure their portion of the funding, the project would not move forward. So, continued financial commitment from all partners is a necessity.

We have an excellent construction management firm providing us with budget estimates that include large contingencies built into them, however currently our world is in absolute turmoil, so those numbers might skyrocket, that would cause the project to stop. Or, let’s say the budget stays the same but we get to the contract tender phase this summer and all the bids come in far higher than the estimates we’ve been relying on, and we determine we can’t afford it. That could happen because workers are scarce, supply lines are broken, materials are unavailable. You can imagine all the uncertainties that lie ahead. No one can know how long it will take for our economy to recover or when that will happen but having a local project ready to go that could provide construction employment and the additional increase in revenues to our local services and businesses would be an excellent thing.

 

 

It's all OUR money the City spending! Doesn't matter which pocket it comes out of. And we won't have much of it once this major post Covid depression hits.

And, of course, the operational costs of such an enterprise will be permanently ongoing, and almost certainly, way beyond any current predictions.

Note the article in Vancouver Sun yesterday (can't seem to get a link):  'Municipalities Losing Revenue, Need Help Form a Victoria and Ottawa to Stay Solvent, Says Vancouver Mayor' - Lazaru.

Why try to push it through now when no one can attend council meetings and the future is so unclear and threatening?

Kathy-  you weren't elected in in the last vote...you ran unopposed, not the same as winning a seat!  Are you Scared YOUR office building will be voted down in a referendum? If you are so confident this is what the people want, than a referendum should be an easy win for you!  And you speak of not requiring a referendum unless you are borrowing money but you are borrowing money from everyone in this town to pay for your pet project....you're just going to call it a raise in property taxes!!!

 

 

 

And, Mayor Moore, with respect to your argument about representative government, you may be legally correct but it is a morally bankrupt position. No one could have foreseen the events that have occurred. May I suggest that you listen to the populace and not try to dictate the direction of the city!

I’m curious:

Are there other things this money should be held in reserve for? Example: are we as fully prepared for the forest fire season as we can be?  Consider the strain all our emergency resources could be facing...

Are we considering ALL the possible options for helping our community during these unprecedented times? And finally, I completely understand the need to not derail all previous plans, but are we giving serious thought to the degree of future challenges coming our way?

Is putting resources to a new city hall our best move here...?

Total abusive of power during pandemic, sad.  Can it not wait? Almost every business and person in town is majorly affected by current global situation.  We have no idea of the impact.  Let's just pause.  Also I agree with Charity.  Referendum is fair after we are moving forward.  Is it not?  

This rediculously long winded response from Kathy is disappointing and can be summed up in one sentence. They are not legally required to hold a referendum and they know what's best for all of us. What's the problem with holding a vote? You may not need to borrow for this project but that likely means future borrowing for important infrastructure projects in the coming years. We don’t have a significant commercial/industrial tax base, this falls on the backs of residents. You may have a beautiful office to work in and a prestigious city hall but it is our money, let us decide. Argue your case but don't push it through. Now with the pandemic and any economic uncertainties to come, it is blatantly irresponsible to push forward with a project THOUGHT UP DURING DIFFERENT TIMES. Both the city and residents themselves face unclear economic futures. 

 

-Colin J

It seems like its constantly the same handful of people casting shade on this project and onto the City...Making personal and passive aggressive comments toward our community leaders.  The reality of democracy is that the majority wins...So there will always be people who disagree with a plan, no matter what.  Every time I read these rude comments, it moves me more and more onto the City's side. Also, recession's are typically proceeded by federal and provincial grants targetting infrastructure repair and improvement as a way to stimulate an economy. That's basically been the game plan in the past, for many successful economies that are faced with a downturn...You start building. It appears we are stepping into a recession, accelerated by COVID-19...and we're arguing about a local infrastructure project that has been awarded grant funding.

I am saddened to read these comments, made possible I think by social media. I wonder who among these critics would phone anyone involved here, or stop them on the street to blast them like this, or would tolerate family and friends in similar positions receiving this kind of rhetoric. It shows either not having read Kathy's information or, if having read it, not having understood. In any case, really, really upsetting.

OrthoM When you say the same "handful of people", you're right. There is a vocal minority on both sides, not just those opposed. That being said, I'm a lifetime resident and this is the first time I've ever felt the need to comment online with regards to city spending. Many other people feel this way.

To minimize very valid opinions by branding them as, "personal and aggressive" is not productive. What you're seeing is frustration from people who have watched their taxes steadily rise to pay for things the city couldn't currently afford. Now this, potentially right before a deep recession. 

I'm afraid I respectfully disagree. Any opinion that is voiced with themes of disrespect, personal attacks or passive aggressive tones is misplaced in this, and in any community debate. Being frustrated is not an acceptable explanation. This is behavoir that, as parents, we try and correct in children. It is certainly not behavoir we condone as adults.

To OrthoM:

Is your comment, "Every time I read these rude comments, it moves me more and more onto the City's side." another way of saying you know it's best to make financial decisions based on fact/evidence but will allow emotion to influence your judgement to the point of ignoring obvious fact/evidence? 

I'm afriad you're interpretation is incorrect.

You state, "Any opinion that is voiced with themes of disrespect, personal attacks or passive aggressive tones is misplaced in this.".

You go on to say, "This is behavoir that, as parents, we try and correct in children." That statement is about as condescending and passive aggressive as it gets when people are frustrated out of concern for their family's financial security. While I agree with you, and don't condone disrespectful rhetoric, you seem to be oblivious to your own.

I also notice you've made no factual counter points to address the valid arguments against the project, only that the people against it shouldn't be listened to. There's only one counter-argument you need to make....Why no referendum? What are your reasons for not wanting to ask the community where their money is spent during these uncertain times?

Have a referendum and advovcate your position for it.

OthroM-  I actually didn't have much of a problem with this project before now. Sure the city 'hall' is excess but Kathy was right about about planning for the future of rossland....Back then.  Now the world has changed...drastically!

The challenge with community debates in forums like this is that they end up transitioning away from the core discussion and become in part about each persons desire for self gratification and acknowledgment. There's no one person to blame as it seems to be an online culture of behaviour. It just turns into people accusing one another, misquoting and arguing about nothing, which devalues the core discussion.  

1) I have no problem accepting there is a housing rental shortage. But why has the ski hill not built staff accomindation? Instead they built a hostel using public money.

2) I would like to know what the City's plan was for a new city hall had this opporunity/partnership not come up? Apparently we have needed a larger building for a while so there must have been a plan. It would have nice if they presented the citizens of Rossland with some opptions.

 

Troy Colautti

I am forced to wonder what vision council has for our city. At this point I can only guess as there has not been a statment clearly indicatiing its vision. My guesses do not make me feel confident or exscited with what should be something every tax payer in this community should bew familiar with and to a greater or lesser extent be on board. I am not on board with spending more money and as a tax payer be on the hook for an increase in taxes. Taxes in this community have increased more than 50% in the past 12 years. Compared to the inflation rate for the same period, the city is well beyond what would constitute reasonable by anyones standards. I have heard from some older timers in town who lament the moving away of life long friends and family due to high taxation. While it is nice to see amenty areas developed and the community looking better than it has looked for some time. The cost of these improvements are not only the cost of flower beds, plants, watering, weeding etc. but also includes gardeners and mantainance. athe skate park was largely build with donated funds except when the group collecting funds decided to quit leaving the city and yes, taxpayers to pick up the short fall. It might have been a better idea to simply say, when we have sufficient funds we  will proceed. Instead, the city(taxpayers)  jumps in pays the short fall. The arena had a period of public input but it was very clear before the process started that the outcome was already decided. We will keep the arena and taxpayers, whether a skater or not will pick up the short fall. 

Does Rossland need a new city hall? There are many empty buildings in town that would satify the needs of council but for some reason,  city council think they need a shiny new building in  order to carry out it's business. The addition of low cost housing (what exactly is LOW COST?). The sale of  the old city halll has been identified as a possible source of funds (probably not in its current condition). Some commented that the ski hill should provide housing for their staff. This is done in other resort communities for similar reasons. Building housing at taxpayers expense does not make a great deal of sense especially given most of the residents are likely to be seasonal and that would  likely leave the residence empty and not colleccting rent for lengthy periiods wit no rent coming in and taxpayers being asked to pick up the tab. When a facility or asset is developed, oit isnot the initial outlay that will impact tax payers, it is the long term impact that must be taken into account. This should be councils's responsibillity to  clearly outtline the short and long term REAL costs of assests not something that does not reflect the real expense. 

Carol, as someone willing to run for Council (sorry Eric there is to be no election) I made a genuine attempt to “Become informed on the project by reading the material shared with the public”. Since I have done so, and believe myself capable of understanding it, in light of the current circumstances, I believe it is the arguments for moving forward that reflect rhetoric at this point, Mayoral statements like: 

 

“I’ve found that most of the people who have taken the time to learn about it end up seeing the merits and revise their opinion about the project.”

 

“we have not heard any insurmountable objections up to this point.”

 

“after robust discussion, we are satisfied that the proposed Mid Town project is both advantageous and suitable for both Rossland’s current and future community members and needs.”

 

So, while I disagree with Mayor Moore that in becoming informed I have revised my opinion and that she has adequately attended to the public objections raised, what I am most amazed at is Kathy establishing the right to speak on behalf of an entire Council as if they have not, and could not, change their minds prior to tonight’s meeting through their own engagement with the electorate. 

 

An Americanized version of representative democracy to be sure, this type of "President knows best" behaviour serves to fundamentally disillusion any citizen who genuinely attempts to engage in a discussion prior to a decision being made by those elected. A problem in Rossland that goes far beyond the current issue, as anyone who appeared before Council on topics such as the Pinewood Subdivision, Paradise Development, or the like knows.

 

OrthoM - Back to the Core discussion.

 

Lip service to transparency aside, the more people know and understand the information provided in this case, the more concerned they should be. 

 

Aside from letting an owner of Red Mtn. participate in establishing the selection criteria for the housing portion alongside a group of volunteers, or concerns surrounding CBT’s dismal record as a corporate neighbour following its investment in the Nowhere Special Hostel, the released information for this project states very clearly that City Hall has placed all its eggs in this one basket, and now finds itself in a position of defending that basket at all costs. 

 

Since Council has not undertaken to repair the old city hall, as of May insurance money runs out and Rossland Taxpayers will begin paying more than $5400/ month for the next two years to stay put while the Corporation of Rossland awaits the construction of its new home.

 

However, “You can imagine all the uncertainties that lie ahead” and since “No one can know how long it will take for our economy to recover or when that will happen” that is only if the timelines for tendering and construction are maintained.

 

Personally, as Sara Golling knows, I am also challenged by the Mayor’s statement that “things are…thoroughly reported by the Rossland Telegraph”. So I quote here a portion of its coverage of the March 9th council meeting: 

 

“Fletcher Quince began to ask questions about the Mid-town development, and Moore informed him that the Council materials for this meeting contain newly-released materials that may answer his concerns.”

 

They did not.

 

As the City Council minutes state, I “inquired about the operating costs of the proposed Mid-Town transition project”. Though these costs reflect a fundamental input to a complete business plan, they have neither been calculated and are not available in any of the documentation. Documentation that does not even make clear whether the property is to be a Strata, or a facility fully owned by the City.  

 

Yes, there are voices that support this project, but when a rough cost estimate for the ongoing cost of the project has not been established, the funding has not been secured, and properties to be sold have not even been listed, a Council decision to support spending a minimum of 25% of the communities reserves on a project intended to support tourism in the middle of a pandemic reflect the continuance of a predetermined want, not a reflection of current need. 

 

The capacity for Rossland to utilize this opportunity to evolve towards Direct Democracy aside, a referendum on the question would cost 0.4% of the anticipated build cost; an amount I expect is significantly less than we are paying our construction management firm; but then, its all a matter of established interests and priorities. 

 

As a horse led to water, what I found just below the surface was simply promotional material and documentation supporting the decision to move forward because it was the best of the limited options examined months ago and what is available is fundamentally lacking in any sustenance for debate, opportunity for participation, or even responses to those reasonable community concerns already raised. Who would want to be forced to drink that?

Completely agree and support you Fletcher!!

Fletcher, thank you for offering such a pointed, experience-based, opinion to this discussion. As a Rossland homeowner, and therefore payer of city taxes, at a minumum I would like to see a referendum regarding this matter. A full civic election in the near future would be considered a welcome luxury. 

Fletcher: Nailed the issues, doesn't drink the koolaid

Likely response:

You cannot just say we have a referendum. You may say ... it sounds nice to say, "we'll have a referendum, here's what it will do" ... but you know ... it just won't be a referendum.

Now, it's going to be a great building, made by fantastic people. It's just a great plan, some are saying it's the best plan ever made for Rossland. An unbelievable plan really. And many many people believe it's going to happen, and that's just what i'm hearing. Believe me.

By the way i must tell you i'm doing very well very well. I have many, many friends.

Fletcher, thanks for weighing in on this & keeping the conversation on track.

I'm curious- did you zoom in to the meeting last night? If so what transpired?

 

Thanks,

Gwen

Thank-you Fletcher for articulating your thoughts. As you have said .."and what is available is fundamentally lacking in any substance for debate, opportunity for participation, or even responses to those reasonable community concerns already raised." The lack of debate and participation is particularly evident now as the development permit was issued last night according to Rossland News on FB, where we see this “We haven’t heard any complaints or compelling arguments against this project,” said Moore.

Quite the disconnect in my view. 

 

This project seems dumb but very much in line with the "if you can't afford the hyper inflation Rossland isn't for you mentality".  I'm sure all the baby boomers and people with tech money will be stoked to take over all the service industry jobs.  Real down to earth.

WearyRider, such disrespect has earned you a really good swift kick in the butt! Now ride your aching butt clear on outa here!

 

Since it is traditional for public buildings to be named after civic dignitaries, perhaps we should do the same here if this ill-advised project goes ahead. 

'Moore's Folly' has a nice ring to it.

And now a 2.5% tax increase to plan for uncertain times? This feels like a hostile joke. Nauseating 

You can defer property taxes, but at a cost: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/property-taxes/annual-property-tax/defer-taxes/interest-fees

 

I don't know why I'm surprised but wow, there are a lot of disrespectful comments on this thread. Some people seem to see social media merely as a place to be nasty. Debate the issues, disagree, state your opinion but personal attacks are a cheap and lazy way to respond. I doubt I'm the only one who is disgusted by this kind of behaviour. 

My advice to our municipal employees and elected officials is choose one platform on which to respond (probably not BHubble which so often falls into carping) and require people to use their real names if they're going to engage. 

Sometimes it feels like taxpayers are the bank City Hall borrows from and never pays back. Have we ever had a reduction in taxes once a big project was complete? Never. Doesn't work that way. Wouldn't it be amazing if there was a desire by Rossland's municipal government to be leaders and models of efficient, cost effective government? Instead it seems they want big projects attached to their name.

There needs to be a major recalibration on how the City operates with much more financial accountability. This starts with leadership. We need a leader who is cost conscious and knows how to stretch a dollar. After all that is what taxpayers are forced to be.

Hello folks, while I was out for my social distancing excercise today, I decided that this is not a productive platform for me to address peoples' concerns, which, and this might truly be Moore's Folly, I do try to do. So, this will be my last post here for the foreseeable future. But it will be my usual long winded reply. :)

There have been legitimate questions raised but there have also been some pretty rude remarks. While I really appreciate what bhubble has to offer- especially for announcing events and buying and selling stuff, I have always been hesitant to engage on the site because people are emboldened to be real jerks, especially when they can retreat behind an alias. I understand that these are really uncertain times and people are scared and upset. Lashing out at me or the City will not solve your problems. But it does really point up a different problem that might come back to haunt all of us in the future. When you re-read this string, or a multitude of others, does it make you want to run for Council? Does it make you want to run for mayor? By slamming the people who do step up to do this work, you inevitably reduce the pool of good people who are willing to take the flack to do so. Who benefits from that? Not our community for sure. I am not saying you don't have a right, an obligation really, to voice your concerns but really, can't you be civil? Not sure it would work for you, but sometimes when I am really ticked off, and I'm ready to fire off a sharp response, I ask myself "what would my mom say?" That is enough to get me to tone down my rhetoric most of the time. :)

For those of you who think that I am not transparent and don't communicate or listen or that the city is run poorly, I can only surmise that you haven't actually lived here very long or if you have, you weren't paying attention. Believe me, I know I'm not perfect, but it's been far worse. If you have been paying attention you would know that over the last few years there has been substantially more financial accountablity and "dollar-stretching" than in prior decades. The comment about not having our taxes go down, does strike me as a bit of wishful thinking. What HAS gone down? Have house prices gone down? What about rental rates? How about labour rates or construction costs? How about the cost of milk? Costs unfortunately and inevitably go up on pretty much everything. To think otherwise is just magical thinking.

Something else that constantly increases is what citizens expect from their municipality. Almost without exception the requests are for more service, not less. More recreation; invest more in trails, fix the arena, more snow plowing, keep the sidewalks cleared and put more sand everywhere. Providing these services comes with a cost. We try to balance what the community needs with what we can afford. Council has to plan for the future, not just react to immediate wishes and demands. (That is where the permanent rental housing and new city hall comes in, more on that later). The only one that is an outlier seems to be that some people want less bylaw enforcement, while so many others want us to catch stray dogs, deal with parking issues, stop backyard burning, make their neighbours be quiet etc etc which would necessitate an increase in bylaw enforcement, but I digress.  

We have done public engagement in a variety of ways over the last few years to try to get input from citizens. Every year we are required under Provincial legislation to present the financial plan for public comment. And every year, almost no member of the public shows up.  In an effort to generate some interest in this important (but a bit dry) topic, we have tried a couple of things. We used Thoughtexchange one year and for the last couple of years Citizen Budget has been a great tool. Through the media, on fb, on our website, on the radio, through our email list, Council even stood in Ferraros handing out little paper invitations; through all these means everyone was invited to give us feedback on the services and facilities that we provide and maintain. So, my question to all the folks out there who think we are doing a sub-par job, did you participate? Did we get to hear your voice? Nope. We are a town of 3,729 people, about 2800 are on our voter rolls, a whopping 114 participated in Citizen Budget this year. Down from 120 last time. And those folks suggested tweaks, not wholesale changes. Mostly they were happy with how we were spending money. 

Believe me, we must continue to run the city and provide the services that everyone needs. The pandemic will end and life will continue. I know, some of you on this string think that building permanent rental housing and a new city hall is a really stupid idea. You are entitled to your opinion. Again, I suggest you go to rossland.ca and look at the material we have been providing on this project. Social media is just a terrible place to discuss this. You have a responsibility to be informed on this important project. (Not just react to someone who says they know someone who read it but they don't think that gal ever went to a public meeting about it etc etc. you get my drift, I hope). We add to it whenever additional reports and analysis are available. At this point, obviously, the project is not complete so some of the details aren't yet available. For example, one commentator was upset because we hadn't disclosed operating costs. True, we haven't for  a couple of reasons 1) because we are not involved in the operating costs of the rental housing (nor the building of it for that matter) and 2) we can extrapolate estimates because we have been paying operating costs on a city hall for 123 years. Yes, the space is bigger so the costs could be incrementally higher, but the building is going to be much more energy efficient so this could make the costs lower. We are soon to get an energy report on the design which will provide more info. In any case its not a deal breaker.  

Ok, for the person who complains that I am longwinded...yep, you are right! But in my own defence, I'm trying to provide info that might help people who are truly interested get a more detailed picture. Now, in closing, I will make this suggestion to everyone. If you would like to talk to me, as one civil being to another, please email me and we can set up a chat on skype or Fb or zoom or a telephone conversation. mayor@rossland.ca. If your interest is in something else, go for it here on bhubble but I won't be reading it. 

What an excellent reply!

viva la' Mayor Moore!

Use your real first and last name when posting your comments, you'll think more before you start typing. 

I I say go for it. Subsidized housing, a city hall on the lower level sounds like a plan. Interest rates have never been lower, and people need to work. Austerity is coming peeps and its going to mean increasing inflation and interest rates. Why wait for that shitstorm.

Thoughtful response Kathy but the distinction between borrowing money and the cost of goods & services is missed. When money is borrowed (or collected) for a specific project - when that project is complete shouldn't the collection stop? Think of a car loan. Isn't there a point when the borrower stops paying for the car? 

I'm getting really sick of our mayor thinking that anyone who disagrees with her is simply not informed enough and needs to read more of the City website. People CAN and DO have different opinions, and they are in fact, informed!