Councillor Budget's Secrecy Continues

Honestly, I was NOT going to do another Councillor Budget BLOG but it is the Star's fault that I am writing this.

I know that you are as sick as I am about reading anything more about the Councillor's ridiculous comment on Monday BUT...

Journalism students might be interested in the comparison between what the Star's City Hall Reporter Roseann Danese wrote on her BLOG on Monday night {Check out the Star website, it's very good} "A new way of gauging the public" and what she wrote in the Star today "Council reduces meeting secrecy."

I would be interested to know, dear reader, if you see a difference in tone and can explain why. Perhaps it is the duality that a Reporter has between "reporting" and "editorializing." Roseann maintains the distinction while perhaps others of her colleagues have lost that ability.

That's NOT why I am writing this BLOG however. Councillor Budget said this:

• "He said the number of private meetings versus open ones is a signal to residents that council is following the rules under the municipal act. "When they see this becomes an issue again, on issues like the tunnel file, on issues like the border file, and even to the extent this has occurred already on the arena file, I'm hopeful the community has the trust in this council to know when an item has to be in-camera under the municipal act."
  

What the heck is that all about concerning the Tunnel? What is Councillor Budget keeping secret? He shot off his mouth once before, about TWO years ago, on the Tunnel with Gord Henderson on May 12, 2005,:

• "It appears the fix might be in on a new home for the Spitfires at Windsor Raceway. But city council's money guy, Dave Brister, thinks it would be a huge mistake to pour tax dollars into an arena at this time.
  
  "There's a vocal minority in favour of an arena. But at this point in time we should not be proceeding with the project," warned the Hiram Walker financial analyst who led the city's 2005 operating budget deliberations.
  
  Brister and his Ward 1 seat mate, Joyce Zuk, were the only councillors to vote on the weekend against renewing the arena quest.
  
  Brister, who groans at the thought of taking a public stand that will get him in hot water with the mayor and his council colleagues, sees "a number of big-dollar issues on the horizon that lead me to believe we should not be proceeding this way. I don't think we need to be spending more tax dollars on bricks and mortar at this point. In my opinion, we're going to need those funds."
  
  TAXPAYER RESOURCES
  
  The budget chairman said he cannot provide any details but there are major issues pending involving the Windsor-Detroit tunnel and Enwin that will onsume "a significant amount of taxpayer resources..."
  
  Brister doesn't buy the argument that the city has already budgeted $15 million for an arena and therefore the expenditure is a non-issue.
  
  "That logic that it's already budgeted escapes me," said the financial analyst. Compared with real needs like deficient sewers and pothole pandemics, he said an arena would be far down on his list of priorities. "Not even my 10th or 20th choice."
  
  He fears the city is getting involved in a project that will cost taxpayers far more than anticipated.
  
  "Do I believe it's going to be limited to $15 million? No way. And if we enter into a partnership with somebody, who generally ends up entertaining the risk? We do."
  
  I don't know about you. But it scares the daylights out of this taxpayer to hear one of the sharpest councillors, an individual who doesn't welcome controversy, sound a heartfelt warning that the city could be going in the wrong direction once again.
  
  Think Canderel. Think Cleary. Remember how lonely were the voices of dissent.
  
  If Brister is worried, we should all be more than a little edgy. And damn anxious to know what misery is coming at Enwin and the tunnel."

Oh come on, give me a break. Let me have some fun. I had to throw in the extra about the arena and Brister's position back in 2005. How he changed and so dramatically didn't he.

Now he is the arena steering committee Chair who just allowed the arena cost to increase by another $3.7 million.

But back to the Tunnel. What was Brister hiding in 2005 about the Tunnel? What was he hiding in 2006? What is he hiding in 2007 so far?

Does it include:

• The huge financial losses at the Tunnel since supposedly the $6.6M dividend ends this year and I assume will have to be made up by taxpayers at Budget time
• cost over-runs at the heritage Tunnel Ventilation Building
• failure to hire a manager who will "breathe" the Tunnel
• lack of scrubber to clean the exhaust from the Tunnel
• 10% drop in traffic
• its unique security risk
• Eddie trying to sell/lease it,
• DCTC's change.

Councillor Budget won't tell us. You see that is what makes him so important in his own mind. He has secrets and we don't so that makes him superior to us. But actually only 2 or 3 of us care.