Wednesday, 23 October 2013

Stadium Financing and Ethical Behaviour

Good evening Regina!!

I'm trying to keep these blog posts to a regular weekly schedule now, but today is a special situation in that the Regina City Council (in the form of the Executive Committee) once again was to vote on the subject of the Regina Revitalization Initiative. Or, as most people know it, the new Stadium. No matter what bullshit you hear from Council, the fact of the matter is - the issue at hand today was, indeed, the Stadium, and not the "rest" of the RRI (you know, the shiny new neighbourhoods and blue sky visions that we've seen in many versions of fly-over computer-generated - assumably pretty expensive - videos). Why they continue to try to put rose coloured glasses on this project is not only insulting, but to me, borderline unethical and should be illegal.

Anyways, as you know, I am not one to let things go without a fight. And, well, today I got just that. I wasn't going in there trying to be combative - today, I actually tried to address Council with respect and a reasonable tone, keeping personal jabs to an absolute minimum. The only one that I did bring up related directly to the motion at hand, and unfortunately the Mayor tried to call me out of order - even though he was not the chair of the Executive Committee meeting today. Out of respect, I obliged; with gritted teeth mind you. What did I say that was so out of order? Well, it's in my second last paragraph in the speech below. Commenting on how I do not trust Mr. Brent Sjoberg, CMA to be put into such a position of authority and responsibility - solely - to negotiate and authorize the spending of $100 MILLION of our tax dollars. Seems like a reasonable request if you ask me, but who am I to judge? Thankfully, the final authority for the issuance of said debt will be given to City Council through the form of a Bylaw, but anyone that's paid attention to City Hall as of late, knows full well that is only a matter of licking that good ol' rubber stamp and whamo, it's put through.

Don't worry, Regina. I've got many more tricks up my sleeve in order to ensure that your voice IS heard by this City Council. 

They may think they can ram this and many other ridiculously expensive construction projects through, as a favour to those that funded their campaigns, but I assure you, they will not do that without a legal battle. Here is my speech that I presented today. I hope to again present this, or a modified version thereof, to City Council on Monday, November 4, 2013.

I hope to see you all there!



Good afternoon Members of Executive Committee,

My name is Chad Novak, and I am here today representing the Saskatchewan Taxpayers Advocacy Group, a truly grassroots group of individuals from Saskatchewan that are pushing for Accountability and Transparency from their municipal governments. I am here to address the recommendation before you today, to authorize your Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Brent Sjoberg, to negotiate external financing to a maximum of $100 Million for the RRI Stadium Project.

I would first like to say that, once again, I feel very strongly that this project should be immediately stopped, pending an independent, unbiased vote of the taxpaying population. I feel that this is necessary in order to properly gauge the proportion of citizens of Regina – and Saskatchewan for that matter – that indeed have an interest in seeing the Stadium Project proceed, as proposed. I would refer you to the recent WWTP Referendum results, where 43% of Regina Citizens did not support a unanimous City Council decision. Considering this, I would suggest to you that the citizens of Regina do not necessarily wholeheartedly support every major financial decision you make. At the very least, they deserve to have a fair, unbiased, neutral referendum hosted by the City of Regina.

NOTE: Mayor Fougere's response to this idea:
We continue to hear from City Council and Senior City Administration about their major concerns for our major infrastructure deficit. When we talk major, we are talking in excess of TWO BILLION DOLLARS. This isn’t chump change, and something that I think we should all begin taking far more seriously. I reviewed some of the campaign platforms for many on our current City Council, and it seemed a common theme was the need to tackle this deficit head on. I am not so blind to acknowledge that many also campaigned on the idea of going ahead with the RRI, but I am a firm believer that, given the option between the two, the citizens of Regina would certainly put infrastructure as a priority over a football stadium. 

What I would like to see from this City Council is to put its money where its mouth is. Step up to the plate and demonstrate, not only to Regina citizens, but also to the Provincial and Federal Government, that you want to get this infrastructure deficit tackled. Any and all major capital projects should be delayed, until we can put a sizeable bite into that deficit. Keep in mind that we do have viable alternatives for the stadium to prolong its usable life – but we do not have that luxury with our roads and water mains. We can’t just put a bandaid on the water mains, but we certainly can on the stadium. Yes, I know there are complaints about parts of the stadium, but to me, complaints about our roads, sidewalks and transit should always take higher priority than any luxury project.

Let’s consider for a minute what Regina might look like if you were to take this $100 Million that you are wanting to issue in DEBT FINANCING, and reallocate it to our roads, sidewalks and transit, to name but a few important issues. Sure we might not be the envy of Canada for having the latest, greatest football stadium, but we most certainly would be the envy of Canada for being one of the first to tackle their crumbling infrastructure head on and having the smoothest roads, and newest and safest underground infrastructure in Canada. Consider now, if we were to take the entire cost of this project and reallocate that to addressing the parking and traffic nightmare that exists in the downtown core and around our hospitals. Consider if we were able to tackle these issues so much that, within four years, we were able to not only put a freeze on property taxes, but also offer a REBATE to the taxpayers! I know this might sound utopian and idealistic, but I strongly believe that if you give the taxpayers a chance to have their voice heard, and offer them an alternative between the Stadium and Core Infrastructure, these kinds of utopian ideas can become a reality.

One common complaint I hear from our Elected Municipal Officials and Senior City Administration is that “we have limited sources of income”. Well, here is a perfect opportunity to demonstrate that you are able to maximize the benefit realized from those limited sources of income. Also, why not consider alternative revenue streams, such as a Land Bank, to supplement what you already have coming in? How about investing Pension Funds locally into a rental housing co-operative, for example, which could have a three-fold benefit? Reasonable pension returns on investment, increasing affordable housing and increasing the sense of community that a housing co-operative offers to its residents. Another viable source of revenue is the $6M per year that is transferred from our utility bills to the general reserve, apparently as an offset for property taxes in-lieu. Or how about the significant advertising revenue that the City loses out on, because they allow private media corporations to not only manage the advertising on the Regina Transit buses, but also to profit at the expense of taxpayers. 

Speaking directly to the issue of authorizing Mr. Brent Sjoberg for negotiating these financing contracts, I have some serious concerns with this, considering that Mr. Sjoberg is currently under investigation by the CMA Office for being in violation of the Code of Ethics on more than one occasion, in situations directly related to his duties as Chief Financial Officer of the City of Regina. I feel that if you must provide some responsibility to him directly; please have at least two individuals assigned for authorization.

NOTE: Mr. Glen Davies, City Manager, clarified that this complaint was apparently dismissed by the CMA Office. Two issues come up on this - 1) On what grounds was the serious complaint dismissed and 2) How is Mr. Davies privy to anything relating a private complaint that even I hadn't talked about publicly?

In closing, I would like to once again suggest that the Executive Committee seriously consider what their priorities are, as elected officials. Reviewing your platforms, I am confident that our Major Infrastructure Deficit is certainly a common priority. What you have to decide today, is whether the Stadium, a recreational facility for the enjoyment of a sporting event, is more important to your constituents than the roads we drive on every day, and the pipes that carry our drinking water to our homes. And, remember, Apathy should never be considered to be Acquiescence. Please allow this vote voluntarily, and do not force the citizens of Regina to take legal action to force an injunction on this project.

Saturday, 19 October 2013

Your City - Your Voice - Your Solution!

Good afternoon Regina!!!

Well, we are only a little over a week away until Hallowe'en, and you know what that means. We are that much closer to the fluffy white stuff coming down! Some shudder at the thought of this, but I am looking forward to it. Obviously I'll miss my convertible top-down days, but I do enjoy the days where the snow comes down ever so softly and creates a warm feeling inside a house with the one(s) you love. I have been so blessed this year with so many great things that have happened for my wife and I, and we will be celebrating Christmas this year in our first ever brand new home!!!! For anyone out there looking to get into a beautiful new home, built by one of Regina's longest and most reputable home builders, feel free to shoot me an email, and I'll do what I can to help you out! (Disclaimer: I am not a salesperson for said home builder, but I do believe strongly in promoting the product that my amazing employer puts out there!)

A few things on my list today, aside from the packing and getting ready for the big move. I had the pleasure of meeting with a brilliant mind today, Mr. Victor Lau, Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan, and we had a great discussion about the political scene in Regina, Saskatchewan and Canada. I know there will be those out there asking themselves: "But, Chad...didn't you JUST announce you were going to seek nomination for the Federal Liberal Party?" And, to those people, I say this: Aaaaannnd? Does that mean I cannot associate with members of other parties or actually work with them in alliance, rather than always competing against them? Everyone knows I am not your "traditional" politician, and Mr. Lau particularly has been an amazing person since the day we first met during the Stadium Petition days. I highly respect him, and I am confident the feeling is mutual. He is a very politically active person, as is his wife, and our ideas are often very well aligned in terms of getting our governments to be more transparent and accountable. The obvious question that comes to mind, I am sure, is "Why, then, aren't you seeking nomination for the Green Party of Saskatchewan?" And, to that, I will only say - who's saying that's not something I have been strongly considering? What's that? A politician supporting two different parties on two different levels? Not quite. I want to make it very clear that I fully support the Saskatchewan Liberals, but I am not so closed minded to ignore other viable alternatives.

Moving onto one of the items of interest that I have been waiting literally months for, and that being the issue of the RECORD DEBT ISSUANCE of $100 MILLION extra by the Regina City Council. Now, while this may not be "news" necessarily, it certainly does open up a communication opportunity to revisit the Regina Revitalization Initiative, and I strongly encourage each and every one of you to do so. Remember - City Council's idea is that if you don't speak up, by default, that means you fully support them. In reality, we know that's not the case, but sadly, that is the mindset of many on our wonderful City Council and Senior City Administration. It is to be considered this Wednesday, October 23, 2013 at the Executive Committee at 11:45AM. If you can make it, great, but most likely you are like many out there, and have this strange thing called a j-o-b, and cannot just take time off of work to attend a middle-of-the-day meeting like this. Trust me, this has been one of my pet peeves for a long time now. The good news is it will also be discussed at the City Council Meeting on November 4, 2013 at City Hall. What's great about this is that it's only two days after the MARCH AGAINST CORRUPTION happening on Saturday, November 2, 2013. I plan to unveil a brief report that day, regarding the corruption that surrounds Regina City Hall, and in particular the most recent debacle, the Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades. You thought that was over? Not by a long shot! As a bit of a teaser as to what's going to be included in this report, I will provide you the following links for your perusal. You can read into the sites at your discretion. (FYI: If the links "mysteriously" disappear, don't worry, I have all of the information saved on my removable hard drive.)

http://www.communitiesoftomorrow.ca/Home/tabid/55/Default.aspx

http://www.communitiesoftomorrow.ca/About/Partners/tabid/59/Default.aspx

http://www.communitiesoftomorrow.ca/About/StrategicAlliances/tabid/60/Default.aspx

http://www.communitiesoftomorrow.ca/About/Background/tabid/58/Default.aspx

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Business+incubator+close/9013153/story.html

Of particular note in the above links:




Questions that came to my mind immediately, once I was provided with the above information, were:
  • Where is Larry Hiles moving on to? Given his past close association with the Government of Saskatchewan and the City of Regina, my bet is - not far. Watch for him to pop up in a senior role within the next few months of a City or Provincially funded organization.
  • Why the coincidental timing of the winding down of two organizations with very similar traits, that being the Communities of Tomorrow and Springboard West? What role did the former CEO of Regina Regional Opportunities Commission and Springboard West Board Chair, Mr. Larry Hiles, have in Communities of Tomorrow and their eventual dissolution "due to lack of government funding"?
  • How did Mr. John Lee receive his "appointment" as President/CEO of Regina Regional Opportunities Commission, coincidentally in the same year as his former role and organization are disolved? Was there a fair competition? Was there even a competitive process? What interest did Opportunities of Tomorrow have in the creation and promotion of P3's - most recently steadfastly promoted by the City of Regina during the Wastewater Treatment Plant referendum?
  • For those that are unaware, the City of Regina funded a "research project" at the University of Regina over the past decade. They recently wound that down in 2011-2012, and no longer support that "research project". I really paid little attention to it at the time, but this is something I will investigate further in terms of whether this project is one and the same as the Opportunities Tomorrow (vis a vis another organization I am sure). If so, what ties does that have now to the dissolution of this organization, and why is the City of Regina providing a cushy job for the individual who formerly headed that organization?

There are many, many other questions that spring to mind, but the above are just a few. I encourage you to ask questions. I strongly encourage you. Not just of these organizations, individuals and the provincial government, but of the City of Regina. What has been happening behind the scenes during the past month, year, decade that we have not been privy to, that seems to have played out according to schedule regarding the results of the P3 WWTP Referendum? Maybe nothing. But I am highly skeptical on that.

Oh....and....what about Future P3's?
http://www.mjtimes.sk.ca/News/Local/2013-09-16/article-3392321/No-decision-yet-on-water-treatment-plant/1

CHAD NOVAK FOR TAXPAYERS - CHANGING REGINA FOR THE BETTER - ONE STEP AT A TIME
Your City - Your Voice - Your Solution

Wednesday, 9 October 2013

Red Light Cameras - Tax Grab or Accident Minimizer?

Good evening Regina!!!

There has been some amazing reporting done by a new(?) reporter, Jill Smith, over at News Talk CJME, and I must say I am very, very impressed with her coverage. I'm not sure if Rawlco has loosened up their belts on how they report things a la City Hall, but whatever the reason, I love the results. Truly unbiased, hard hitting reports that get to the heart of the story.

Recently, CJME News broke the story of how at least one of our Red Light Cameras in Regina are not actually in operation. In fact, it hasn't been in operation for at least the past three years! Why? The best explanation is that the sensors were removed when they repaved the Lewvan. To me, there has to be more to this story, but if that's honestly what the justification is, I find it completely ludicrous that Mayor Michael Fougere (then Councillor) is claiming this is the first he'd heard of it. Now, I know the Mayor's seat doesn't get to see everything in this City, but considering he sits on the Board of Police Commissioners, as did his right hand man, Mr. Fiasco, one would reasonably expect him to be cognisant of this issue prior to an outside media outlet reporting on it. 

Now, to me, the question becomes: Are the Red Light Cameras as good as the City leads us to believe? Are they purely a tax grab, or do they actually cause drivers to adjust their behaviour in such a way that reduces the accidents at said intersections? Well, based on the facts laid out in CJME's report, I'm leaning more towards the fact that they are nothing but a tax grab, and do nothing to actually reduce accidents. In fact, if anything, they cause more. There are schools of thought on the severity of accidents being minimized, but honestly, you must factor in environmental equations into the mix, and remove "chance" happenings from the statistics. This is one reason why statistics are a horrible way to measure "success" of a program that is not impervious to human error.

In the end, the City of Regina (or apparently some unknown party) has collected over $1 MILLION in fines from the Red Light Cameras over the past few years. ONE MILLION DOLLARS. That's WITHOUT one of them even working! And, accidents actually went up. To me, this is a no brainer, and is something that the Mayor of Regina and the Board of Police Commissioners should take a serious look at. Why have a system that penalizes drivers (actually the owners of said vehicles, not even the actual driver as it could be someone else driving your vehicle) after the fact, rather than having a system set up to - say - lengthen the time from a Yellow Light being triggered to a Green Light being triggered for the cross traffic? One very easy, albeit very simplistic, idea to look at.

CHAD NOVAK FOR TAXPAYERS - CHANGING REGINA FOR THE BETTER - ONE STEP AT A TIME
Your City - Your Voice - Your Solution

Monday, 7 October 2013

How Can I Support CUPE Spending?

Good evening Regina!!

I was sent this email by a reader of my blog, and felt that it was a great question, and one that I should post on my blog for others to read. I am all about being accountable and transparent, so I think this is probably a question that others may be asking themselves. I wanted to shed some light on this question, in case anyone else out there is wondering as well. Just for your information, you can always email me your questions or concerns about anything relating to Municipal Politics, and I will do my best to answer you. I will also publish some on my blog for inquiring minds, just like the one below. Enjoy!

Chad,

I have read your blogs and the concerns you and Water Watch Group have with the city promoting the "No" side and giving information about P3's to the public.

Now lets just put aside the information that has been put out there by both sides as each side has accused each of putting lies and false numbers out there.

You have City Council who approved 100% the P3 option and the Water Watch group who is for the traditional method.

The "yes" side was funded by CUPE and the Waste Water Watch group with signs and ads saying vote "yes" along with information on their website.

My question to you is how does the "no" side, city council get the information out there for P3's and to vote "no"?  If the city spent no money on showing and promoting their side then all anyone would have seen was a one sided campaign for vote "yes"

Not all union members agree with their union so I would like to know did CUPE get approval to spend all that money on the national anti P3 campaign?

For you and the Water Watch Group to request the city not to promote their side while you go around promoting your side is hypocritical.
 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you so very much for your question, and I appreciate your sincerity and candor in your comments.

What I would first like to say is that I am in no way, shape or form associated with Regina Water Watch, other than being an active supporter of their efforts. I signed the petition to request a referendum, keeping mind that a signature does not necessarily mean an "anti-P3" stance, it simply means that the electorate would like more information and to have an informed discussion and vote on the situation at hand.

With that said, I have continued to maintain a view that I work to inform taxpayers of both sides of the equation. Of course, it's probably no secret that I was going to Vote Yes for a while now. However, I have tried to remain as neutral as possible, even with co-workers who simply wanted to know "how" I was voting just so they can vote the same. I have pushed hard to ensure people voted informed. For me, that is what your elected officials at the City of Regina should have done. Yes, it was obvious that they supported, whole heartedly, the P3 stance.

However, that does not negate the fact that they are still human, and humans make mistakes every now and again. I strongly encourage everyone to always challenge governing powers, no matter if it's Mayor Fiacco, Mayor Fougere, Premier Wall, Prime Minister Harper, or if I was ever so fortunate, myself in whatever role I may attain.

The City Council, without question, had a position to ensure that they informed the public on exactly why it was that they chose to support the P3 process. Unfortunately, the only arguments I have ever seen from them is in regards to a "potential opportunity of funding" of the $58.5M that - at the time of the original vote in February 2013 - was only speculative at best. Keep in mind that it was only the week prior to the petition deadline that Mr. Tom Likuiski, MP, joined Mayor Fougere in a sealed City Hall Forum where he announced the promise of funding of "up to $58.5M" in Federal Funding. We could argue all day as to where that figure comes from, or what it means in terms of the total cost of the project. In the end, to me, this was very obviously done for only one reason, and during the Referendum Campaign, we saw exactly why that was done. If Mr. Likuiski didn't have that Press Conference, the City Council would have had virtually nothing to campaign on. Notice how the only advertising you ever saw from the "Vote No" position was tied to that $58.5M. I told Regina Water Watch that this was KEY in the City's efforts, and if they were able to debunk that with facts about other Federal and Provincial Funding, they would have been able to take one of the only arguments the City had, out of their hands. Unfortunately, Regina Water Watch chose their own direction, and that was their perogative.

What I have a serious issue with in regards to the Referendum Vote No campaign is not so much City Council, but City Administration. The deliberately found a loophole in the provincial legislation, where there was no explicit instruction that prevented the City of Regina from using taxpayer money to fund a Vote No campaign. What's worse, is that they were able to use City of Regina paid staff to also promote that side. For me, the City of Regina Corporation should have remained NEUTRAL on the situation, and spent their time and money to inform the electorate of exactly what information that City Council used to make their informed decision. What's even more unfortunate is that Municipal Referendums follow the Local Government Elections Act, which governs Municipal Elections. When you factor that in, where the City of Regina took it upon themselves to support a side of the Referendum, the bigger question becomes: Would they be allowed to also fund and support a particular candidate in a Municipal Election. And, after speaking with the Municipal Relations Ministry, and staff that are paid to interpret and write that legislation, that is exactly the case. While extremely unethical, there is nothing in the Provincial Legislation that explicitly prevents the City of Regina from financially supporting a particular candidate in a Municipal Election, both for advertising and staff support.

This, to me, is what is the most concerning part of this Referendum. And, it is my hope that the rest of the City of Regina taxpayers see this as well. I will continue to make a very concerted effort to bring this to the forefront as it needs to be dealt with. Either the City of Regina admits this is a serious problem with the way they govern things, or they face these issues in a Court of Law. To me, it would seem that dealing with these issues outside of a Court would be in everyone's best interests, but I think we've all been witness to exactly how the City Council and Senior Administration feel about that.

If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Best Regards,
Chad A. Novak, CMA
Saskatchewan Taxpayers Advocacy Group 

Tuesday, 1 October 2013

Former Mayor "Threat"??

Good evening Regina!!!

I wasn't planning on another Blog Post for a couple of days, but tonight, I got the most interesting of Tweets, and I think it's worthwhile for my readers to see it. Personally, I would deem this to be very much a threat, and I hope that the Regina Police Service are continuing their investigation on this kind of activity on my open file on Mr. Pat Fiacco, amongst other individuals, for the constant online and offline harassment of myself.

Let's examine this statement "Pay the Piper" for a second:
Now, I'm not a violent person - never have, never will be. But, when you have a professional boxer making this statement, one would think there may be a physical element to it. I'm hoping not, but I sincerely hope that the Regina Police Service are watching this post and are going to start finally taking this file seriously.

Saturday, 21 September 2013

Why Not a Stadium Referendum Question?

Good afternoon Regina!!!

I have heard from many, many great Regina Taxpayers over the course of the past while, and one common element I keep hearing is "Why didn't they put the Stadium to a referendum?" (Also of note, I've heard on more than one occasion that this referendum should also be considered a Vote of Non-Confidence/Impeachment if the Vote YES side wins)

Just as an FYI for everyone reading this. No matter the turnout of this referendum, ANYONE can file a Court Injunction to immediately stop the development of the Stadium until City Council satisfies the public desire to have their input on the project. Now, I am not saying I want to see another referendum; the City has made it quite evident how they would approach such a thing (unethically and borderline illegal activity), but I do know that I have heard many, many folks state that they’d have rather had a referendum on the Stadium, and can’t believe that the City Council wouldn’t put it on this ballot anyways.

Keep in mind – The referendum you are voting on is NOT the result of Regina Water Watch’s petitioning. As great and amazing as they had been in their efforts, the City of Regina deliberately ignored the true intention of the Provincial Legislation (Cities Act and Local Government Elections Act) and deemed “just enough” signatures to be “invalid” to consider the petition invalid. Thus, when Regina City Council decided to pursue the referendum anyways, “on their own accord”, they had the opportunity to word the question however they wanted, include as many questions as they wanted, and have as many options as they wanted.

Public opinion is that they “gave in” to public pressure and worded the question EXACTLY as the petition, because if they didn’t, well, they’d have faced a pretty angry electorate and they’d guarantee themselves no re-election in 2016. However, the reality is that because they chose to pursue the referendum on their own accord, the results are NOT BINDING, at least as far as those that wrote the legislation are telling me. It would be absolutely ludicrous for the City to deny the electorate if a Vote Yes wins, but unfortunately, nothing would surprise me anymore with this group of self-entitled blowhards.

Regarding the Stadium issue, I DID request that the City of Regina put this question on this referendum, since they were going to incur the costs of a referendum anyways, and that seemed to be a big argument against the Stadium Petition drive during the election. (The reality is they just didn’t want to hear the true opinions of an informed electorate) They outright refused, with the explanation that “we believe people gave us the mandate by voting us all in – in the 2012 Municipal Election”. Translation: “Nah, nah, nah we won – you didn’t – too bad, go cry in a corner.
This leaves only one other option. That of legal means. And, considering I’ve already begun legal action against the City of Regina, as has Mr. Keith Peterson for a completely separate matter, this would not be too difficult to add to the case in a motion, if we so chose. (FEDERAL COURT for those who want to search the publicly available documents - EDIT: Apparently someone has already searched the documents and made them available on the internet - See links below)

Who Would You Trust?

Good morning Regina!!!

There has been a question posed by the Regina Chamber of Commerce on more than one occasion, and it's really a very simple question: "Who do you trust more? Those you elected or a national organization?" Well, given the following situations, I think, in a healthy society and democracy, putting blind faith in your elected officials is not only ridiculous, but actually can be very dangerous. Am I saying to never trust your elected officials? Of course not. But, to hold them accountable only once every four years at election time is not only irresponsible, but has the potential to harm the taxpayers in far more ways than it helps them.

http://globalnews.ca/news/647472/montreal-mayor-arrested-by-quebec-corruption-police/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/former-montreal-mayor-applebaum-paid-more-than-250000-in-exit-fees/article13285624/

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Clarence+Rockland+mayor+councillors+lawyer+formally+charged+political+corruption+probe/8929714/story.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/19/us-usa-crime-neworleans-idUSBRE98I15I20130919

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/arrests-of-3-mayors-reinforce-floridas-notoriety-as-a-hothouse-for-corruption.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4430985,00.html

I hope you'll pardon me if I don't necessarily have the confidence to put blind faith in our "elected" officials. In a democracy, it is healthy to question those that represent you, otherwise you can have situations like:


Thursday, 19 September 2013

BREAKING: Is this democracy??

Good morning Regina!!!

UPDATE: I have sent an email to Government of Saskatchewan this morning, outlining my serious concerns with the City of Regina sending this Voter Information Card to the electorate. I am hoping they will respond on this within a short timeframe. In the meantime, here is a copy of said email:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good morning,
I am attaching a photo of the Voter Information Cards that the City of Regina is distributing to voters leading up to the Referendum on September 25, 2013. The Mayor has stated that there will be no other information cards mailed out, and thus, it is my interpretation that this is the official Voter Information Card for voters to know where they will be voting. The Mayor claims that this did not come from the City Clerk's office, that there is a "firewall" between the Mayor's Office and the City Clerk's Office. Obviously, my concern here is purposely instructing people to "Vote No" on the same pamphlet that tells them where to vote. Is this, in any way, a violation of the Cities or Local Government Elections Act, and if so, what recourse does the average taxpayer have against the City of Regina in this instance? Would the Government of Saskatchewan be willing to step in on this issue?
Thank you in advance for any assistance you can offer in this regards.
Best Regards,
Chad A. Novak, CMA
Saskatchewan Taxpayers Advocacy Group
www.chad4regina.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This. Is. HUGE. Please share with all your friends who demand transparency, accountability and independence from your City Hall!!

Check out @JohnKleinRegina's Tweet: https://twitter.com/JohnKleinRegina/status/380780339750137857


By the Way Regina, PLEASE DO NOT BELIEVE THE WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING. The City Council, Chamber of Commerca and others continually say "Who are you going to trust?" 

Well, I don't blindly follow politicians with Carte Blanche authority. If you do, it leads to situations like Pamela Wallin, the Corruption in Montreal, and more! PLEASE DON'T BE A "SHEEPLE"

Ask questions of your elected officials, and DEMAND ANSWERS!!! 

They work for YOU, not the other way around.

 

Wednesday, 18 September 2013

CUPE vs City of Regina?

Good morning Regina!!

First off, I just want to quickly mention, for those of you who did not attend last night, or watch the LIVE stream, I have officially announced my intentions to seek nomination for the Liberal Party of Canada in the next Federal Election. I will post more details on that in the coming weeks. For now, here is the link to the stream for your viewing pleasure.

Now, this past week, the University of Regina "Carillon" posted an editorial that was, in my opinion, quite one sided and very misleading. I have asked how to clear the air on what I feel is misleading, and I was told I could submit a Letter to the Editor. I'm confident that it's far too long, and probably far too factual, to get published, so here is the letter in it's entirety.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the Carillon (U of R student publication) editorial "This September, Vote No To CUPE", I feel there are some extreme myths that are being shared that, sadly, even they have fallen prey to. The City of Regina has been deliberately muddying the waters, pun intended, in order to confuse and distract the voters from the real issues at hand.

First off, remember 24,000+ taxpaying citizens signed the petition. TWENTY-FOUR THOUSAND!! Do you honestly believe that many folks were "duped" by the Regina Water Watch (RWW) folks into whatever ridiculous message it is that the City of Regina is saying that RWW had "deliberately misinformed" petition signers? This is a ludicrous claim, and one that I find appauling that the City would even suggest. The fact of the matter is, this IS about our water supply, this IS about protecting a public resource that many in our world don't have the ability to even have access to. This IS about the citizens rights, and respecting democracy. No matter how you slice it, the fact of the matter is that ALL WATER goes back into the ecosystem to eventually become another's drinking water. Where do you think our water comes from? Also, keep in mind it wasn't that long ago that the City of Regina had taken on massive advertising campaigns to remind us how important our entire water system is, including wastewater, in an effort to remind the Federal Government how they shouldn't differentiate between the two in their efforts to get additional infrastructure funding. (See below image)
Secondly, I am not a member of any union. Nor do I believe that even half of the 24,000+ that signed the petition are union members. Do I support unions? Of course they have their place in society. Like any organization, some lose their vision of their original existence, to prevent corporate abuse of basic human rights, but as a general rule, unions do serve a very vital purpose. We are seeing this very evidently in this referendum, as there are CUPE members being forced by the City of Regina to support City Council's decision, regardless of whether or not they personally support it or not. I personally do not care if CUPE funds RWW $1 or $1 Million, if it helps to protect DEMOCRACY then the more power to them!
As a Certified Management Accountant, I have studied P3's in depth, and there has been much debate over P3's amongst the CMA community for many years. There have been great arguments to both sides, and don't get me wrong, P3's certainly do have a time and a place that make sense. For example, the Stadium would be a prime example where a P3 would be a fantastic opportunity (BTW - It's NOT a P3, no matter what 'some' individuals will lead you to believe). However, a vital resource such as water/wastewater should never, ever be jeopardized by putting it into the hands of private, FOR PROFIT, corporations. Call it privatization, don't call it privatization. The fact is, a private, FOR PROFIT, company WILL operate, finance and maintain it, if the City of Regina gets their wish on September 25. How much profit? The City will not tell us, citing "privacy". However, as per the below image, it would appear 22% is not an unreasonable number. So, in essence, the P3 would have to save us over 22% of the total cost over the 30 years, just to be on even grounds as a traditional DBB model. Where are those savings going to occur? Either increase revenues (utility costs to you and I) or cut expenses (staff, standards, etc.). Add to that the fact that a private company also borrows at a higher interest rate than government, and it makes it even harder to come anywhere close to the cost efficiency of keeping it in public hands.

Finally, in regards to the supposed $79.6M that the City is touting as "savings" realized by a P3, one must keep in mind this is NOT REAL MONEY. This is the assigned dollar value to that of their assumed "risk" that is transferred to the private company. This is a common misconception, and should never be factored in as seriously as the City has. Yes, risk is real and it's nice to transfer that to someone else. But a FOR PROFIT company isn't dumb enough to tell it's investors "hey, check this out, we get to take on more risk, which means you might make less money!!". No investor in their right mind would put their money into that. As for the Federal $58.5M, all I am going to say is there ARE other Federal monies available, as well as potential provincial monies, and all the City of Regina needs to do is put the request into the right department. Many, many other municipalities have done this, and succeeded, and won awards for innovation in design. Why can't we?

Sincerely,
Chad A. Novak, CMA
Saskatchewan Taxpayers Advocacy Group
www.chad4regina.com
(Mayoral Candidate in the 2012 Municipal Election)


Thursday, 12 September 2013

Take a STAND Against the Chamber of Commerce

Good afternoon Regina!!

This amazing individual did what I hope many other members of the Regina Chamber of Commerce are doing, and sent in their honest feedback regarding their disgusting tactic of purposely misleading their membership regarding the Wastewater Treatment Plant Referendum. I want to extend my congratulations to this individual and hope that more join the effort to not only work to VOTE INFORMED on September 25, but also to tell those that deliberately LIE to you just what you truly think of their tactics.

Attention Regina City Council, Senior City Administration and Regina Chamber of Commerce:  
Respect Democracy and tell people the TRUTH about the referendum!!

From: Orion Paradis
Engineer, Producer at SoulSound 
*Posted with express written permission from Mr. Paradis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just received the latest "ChamberLink" magazine which I assume they started sending me because I run a small business - I was very dismayed by their coverage on the P3 Wastewater question.

Here is the email I sent them:

"Hi,

I was very disturbed to find that new Regina ChamberLink Magazine (Sept 2013) has a very biased and uninformative article about the upcoming referendum, which leads with the cover quote "Would YOU like to pay higher utility fees".

Obviously, no one would, but there is no way one can say for sure that a P3 model will deliver lower rates over the body of the 27 year contract - this is misleading your readership by painting a black & white picture of higher rates vs continued public management.

I also did not like the way that unions are demonized as having some kind of hidden agenda - are decent working hours, wages and health benefits some kind of communist plot from 1950, or can we agree that unions are made of regular Canadians who have the right to negotiate on their own behalf?

I also must take exception to the enlarged quote on the first page of the article "Ultimately we are asking voters to ask this one simple question: Who do you think really has your best interest in mind, the people you elected to act on your behalf or an organization backed by the largest public sector union in Canada"

I would point out that the "people elected" in Ottawa are trying to push an ideological model on our city by dangling this money which comes with "you must P3" strings attached - why does the federal government care to interfere with the democracy in Regina - they should be giving us this money in good faith and letting it be used in the model we choose to adopt - not attempting to force our hand.

As well, our "people elected" in Regina (with the exception of Councillor Shawn Fraser) have repeatedly shown that they are more interested in getting the P3 deal pushed through, than dealing with the hassle of engaging in a healthy democratic debate with their own electorate. From attempting to change the petition rules for number of signatures needed, to discounting signatures based on minor technicalities, to engaging in robocalls and finally spending hundreds of thousands of tax payers own dollars to get them to vote "No" instead of educating them to make their own decision - these are all signs of a broken democracy.

I do not trust a council or mayor who believes this is the path to proper civic governance - there were only 33% of Regina voters who elected this council, so I think we can safely assume they do not have the majority mandate without public consultation on important issues such as this one.

Waste water IS water - it goes back into the watershed and continues to cycle though our environment - this is a public trust which can not be turned over to a "for profit" entity, even in joint partnership. It is city councils responsibility to manage this trust for the people of Regina and those down river of our city. It is the councils job to figure out how provide this service without offloading any of the the accounting and responsibility to a private firm.

Please remove me from your mailing list - I have no interest in your magazine and will work very hard to help the YES side win."

Friday, 6 September 2013

Why I Am Voting YES on September 25, 2013

Happy weekend Regina!!

You may have seen my flyers downtown, but if you haven't already, I'm posting this information today for your reading enjoyment. As I strongly pushed for during the 2012 Civic Election, I am a very strong believer in being accountable and transparent to you, the taxpayers of Regina. As such, I want to inform you as much as possible about the upcoming Referendum without explicitly telling you HOW to vote. I want to give you as much information, so that you can become an informed voter, and make your own informed decision on September 25, 2013. You know, kind of like what the City of Regina SHOULD BE doing!

Below, I provide to you an explanation as to one of the main reasons that I, personally, am voting YES on September 25, 2013. As I said above, I do not want to push you one way or another, but if you read what I write below, and wonder why the City of Regina continues to dodge even the most basic of questions regarding the Wastewater Treatment Plant P3 Referendum, then I have a strong feeling you may be inclined to vote yes, to keep our public utitlities PUBLIC.

Why I am Voting YES on September 25, 2013
– By Chad A. Novak, CMA (Saskatchewan Taxpayers Advocacy Group) www.chad4regina.com

Amongst many other concerns, my primary concern is that the “Value For Money” argument is not supported anywhere in the Deloitte report. The reason for this is that it is completely mythical, and has no evidence to back it up, and is a hypothetical assumption at best, assigning a dollar figure to what it determines to be the “risk” associated with the potential delays in the construction from a Design, Bid, Build project. THIS is where the City got its magical $79.6 Million “savings” that they touted for months, and allegedly based their decision in February 2013 on. If this is true, then their very “unanimous” decision is very flawed. Add to that the fact that many experts in the industry have determined that the “Value for Money” argument is completely subjective, and can easily be manipulated to support any kind of argument that a party would like to. Keeping in mind that a Private Company would build this WWTP regardless of P3 or DBB, one has to wonder just how realistic these risk assumptions/”Value for Money” are. Assuming, of course, that the P3 benefits include promises included in an eventual contract that would withhold money from the private company if it didn’t perform to standards.

When you factor in the $58.5 Million that the City of Regina is advertising as “lost money” if it doesn’t choose a P3, of course, to the layperson, this would scare the hell out of them to say “Well, why would anyone NOT want to support this P3 project?” The $58.5M seems to be the City’s only argument now, and they’ve even gone to the extent of breaking it down to an annual “savings” on your utility bill of $276/year for 4 years. What they aren’t telling you is that there is indeed other Federal and Provincial Funding available. Until recently, they have said these have long expired, and thus are no longer on the table. Recently, the Mayor realized that this funding is continuing well into the future, but claims “the next funding” isn’t happening until 2014, which apparently, in his mind, is too late. In addition, they aren’t telling you that the total cost of the WWTP Upgrades has been represented in such a manner to make the WWTP seem like a “deal” when you factor in the P3 Grant, even though just last July it was being publicly advertised as a $150M project, and is still to this day only a $120M project, according to Enterprise Saskatchewan. The City of Regina would have you believe that the project is now in the $224-$234M range, but provide nothing other than “oops, we forgot inflation” as their justification. They fail to mention that in the “Pro P3” Deloitte report, it states that any projects lower than $224M are “unattractive” to investors. Coincidence?
On September 25, Your Choices Are:
Vote No
-------------------------------------------------------------------
- Up To $58.5 Million P3 Grant available
- Outsource non-management jobs and operations
- Control handed over to a for-profit corporation
- Higher bills due to private profit being added

Vote Yes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
- Canada Builds grant available - Amount still TBD
- Provincial Funding possible (based on similar projects)
- Jobs and Operations protected
- Control stays with the public
- Bills are lower as no profit needs to be added



Monday, 2 September 2013

Land Annexation - Who's Profiting??

Good evening Regina!!

Apparently, I have to draw a map for some people to get them off my back. Well, "some people" being those that our former Mayor has to sick on me, because he's too scared to face me himself. Regarding the lands that Mayor Fougere and the City of Regina are looking to annex from the RM of Sherwood - specifically the land to the immediate Southwest of Regina - otherwise known as "Harbour Landing West", including Devonia Park. These lands are (or were??) owned by a number of individuals/corporations, but most notably being Mr. Pasquale Fiacco (aka Pat Fiacco), and his two brothers, courtesy of a gift from their parents in 1974. Also, notable of course would be Dundee Developments, which was headed by Mr. Tom Shepherd until 2008. But more on Mr. Shepherd in a future post.

Why is this such a big deal? Well, when you become Mayor and get lands developed that were never intended to be developed, paving the way for the lands that you own to get developed, that were once worthless because of the government's decision in 1974 to disallow foreign ownership of lands for speculative purposes, there tends to be some issues with that. Then, when you conveniently step down as mayor and mere months later, you want the City to annex those same lands which immediately makes your land more valuable, and you already have apparently arranged for an extension to the subdivision that you helped get built, to be developed on your lands, making you extremely rich when you sell those lands to that developer, that's when people like me and about 24,000 others who have a problem with Democracy being disrespected in Regina ---- that's when we have an issue. 

Not only is this unethical, but it also tends to lead to court action. And, if one can prove such actions were deliberate to defraud taxpayers, CRIMINAL CHARGES are sure to follow. And people wonder why Pat Fiacco and his family and friends (aka ‪#‎yqrmafia‬) have been working so diligently to discredit ANYONE (not just me) that dared to challenge him within the past decade.

This is scheduled to be discussed on October 15 (or November 4) at 5:30PM at City Hall.

Please, if you care for your City and want democracy respected in Regina, attend and demand justice be served for this disgusting behaviour. Please do share and invite all of your friends and family to attend that day.

(If you plan to speak - Please, try to keep your speeches on topic, and in as respectful a tone as possible. Also, note, you will have ten minutes to speak, and please respect decorum in Council Chambers by not applauding - as much as you may want to.)



Here is my original blog post on this issue:
http://novak2012.blogspot.ca/2013/07/rm-land-annexation-and-conflict-of.html