Deferral Request---Do You See The Pattern

If you have read all 3 speeches, you may see a pattern. That is what scares me a lot and what I will be BLOGGING about over the next little while.

I am very troubled, not because Council did not support my point of view, but because I received clear proof, to me anyway, that our City is in sad shape.

REASONS FOR DEFERRAL

I want to read to you what the Ministry of Municipal Affairs has to say about section 203 companies and to demonstrate that this is a very serious matter that requires a full consultation with all of the Councillors present.

• “the Province has no interest in seeing municipalities create taxpayer-subsidized corporations to compete in areas that are well served now by private sector companies, nor to forestall the private-sector playing its traditional role in providing goods and services to Ontario’s communities, their residents and their businesses. Municipalities would focus their attention on core service areas.”

1) It is obvious that what is being discussed tonight is merely the first step in a multi-step process. We should know everything that is going on and not just be told about incorporation. Once a company is incorporated, the whole file can be taken out of the control of Council and taxpayers. “confidentiality” and the barrier of a limited liability company with its own board of directors are wonderful tools for secrecy

2) You have disenfranchised the taxpayers of Ward 3 by going forward tonight.

One Councillor wrote to me and said he would not consent to a deferral because the two Councillors did not ask for one. Well I am a Ward 3 homeowner asking for one! Don’t taxpayers count?

It is shameful that this matter is proceeding tonight, something so important for Windsor, in the absence of 2 senior Councillors both of whom are from Ward 3. As a home owner from that Ward, I want my Councillors there to protect my issues and let me know what their position is .

The Mayor knew they were not going to be in attendance since Councillor Jones advised at the previous Council meeting that several Councillors were going to be away and should not have scheduled the session while they were absent. It can wait for another week or more appropriately be scheduled as a “separate” public consultation where there is time to have a true consultation with the public

3) [airport lands] the City bids and tenders website says that the RFP for airport lands closes June 28 so this issue is premature

4) It appears from the reports that the only notice given respecting the public consultation was placement on the City's website. That can hardly meet the objective of the Municipal Act for a proper consultation. Proper notice must be given to the public similar to other notices that the City is required to give out for important matters. At least 30 days notice should have been given including several public advertisements in major media

5) The business case studies should be redone and be done properly. They should include as a minimum as the Pevious regulation 168/03 stated:

• A). The projected financial consequences for the next five years, including the advantages and disadvantages and risks for the municipality, and a comparison with other options considered for providing the same service or facility.
• B). The scope of the business to be carried on by the corporation
• C). The governance structure to be set out including the composition, role and term of office of the directors of the corporation.
• D). The accountability requirements of the corporation to the municipality and its taxpayers, including,
  I. A policy on access by the public to the records and meetings of the corporation,
  Ii. A summary of any proposed or existing agreements between the municipality and the corporation or between the corporation and its shareholders,
  Iii. A summary of all financial reporting or audit requirements,
  Iv. A statement of the financial risk to the municipality related to the corporation and its activities, and
  V. A statement of any tax implications to the municipality, including the expected tax treatment of the corporation.
• E). The original value, as estimated by the treasurer of the municipality, of any investment by the municipality in the corporation, including any assets to be transferred to the corporation and services or other benefits to be provided to it, and the fair market value of and explanation for any proposed program for assistance to be provided to the corporation
• F). The value of any proposed investment in the corporation by a private person.
• G). The original value, as estimated by the treasurer of the municipality, of any funds contributed by the province of ontario towards the purchase or improvement of any assets intended to be transferred to the corporation and evidence that section 21 has been complied with.
• H). The winding-up provisions of the corporation, including provisions respecting voluntary dissolution, bankruptcy, involuntary wind-up and the disposition of assets.
• I). The authority of the municipality to provide any facility or program that is to be provided by the corporation for the municipality.
• J). The corporation’s proposed or existing policy on setting fees and charges and an explanation of how the municipality will protect the interest of taxpayers and ensure that value for money is being obtained in delivering services.
• K). How the municipality intends to address any labour and employment issues that arise as a result of the proposed action by the municipality.
• L). An asset management plan for any corporation that will receive municipal assets.
• M). How the municipality will ensure that both itself and the corporation adhere to applicable performance standards for the delivery of services and comply with any other duty or obligation required of the municipality or corporation under any act, regulation or policy directive issued by the province or the federal government underBill C-3.
• N). The public competition process used or to be used to select any investor in the corporation who is a private person.
• O) the competitive position of the asset
• P) the unique security risks of the Tunnel and how the City proposes to cure them