Recently, the Township of Langley held several closed-door meetings for the Mayor's Standing Committee on Finance. Mayor Rick Green spoke to the Bylaw/Terms of Reference that created the committee and although the Bylaw talked about all meetings being opened to the public, Green invoked a Community Charter section to substantiate the closed door meetings.
Unlike Council that must disclose in a public meeting the broad item headings discussed (Land, Legal or Labour), the Finance Committee never did this in any public meeting thereafter. The mayor flip-flopped by calling these meetings workshops and meetings interchangeably. But we cannot be certain if ANY closed door meetings by this committee were in fact legal. The Green-Richter slate talked extensively during their campaigns about open and transparent government. These back alley meetings are not very open and transparent, are they?
Now word out of Seattle (great Seattle Times article here) is that municipalities had better be VERY careful about closed door meetings in the future. Seattle is facing a $43M shortfall in this year's budget and the mayor's office decided they should have a closed meeting with mayor and council to discuss how to deal with it. They planned to skirt quorum rules (that would then require an open public meeting) by limiting council participants to four at any one time.
"City Attorney Tom Carr said he sent an e-mail to the City Council on Friday morning. Citing attorney-client confidentiality, he declined to share the contents of his e-mail. However, the day before, he told The Seattle Times he had concerns that the meetings might violate state law.
Carr said Friday that he didn't know why council members decided to stop the private meetings, adding, "It might have been your article. It does show their commitment to try to adhere to both the letter and the spirit of the law," he said.
The state's Open Public Meetings Act requires that meetings of public governing bodies be open. The law applies to their votes — and discussions and deliberations leading up to votes.
The mayor's office and the city council defended the meetings this week, saying it was important to them to be able to speak privately about budget decisions out of the public eye."-- The Seattle Times
You can read more damage control from Seattle here. Maybe we need an "Open Government group" in the Township of Langley? Perhaps the Green-Richter slate should come clean as to what was discussed at their secret budget meetings and how their proposed .93% tax increase is nothing less than acting irresponsibly with their fiduciary responsibilities to the Township of Langley and the taxpayers?
11 comments:
Great story!! It sounds all too familiar to what has been happening in the Langley Township, too bad our Mayor has not got the guts to admit he was wrong!!!
Bad Poetry - 2 - Ode to a Green Langley!
Roses are Red, Violets are blue,
This is all about Green and not about you,
Lets have a meeting but exclude 1,
And we can call it a workshop and all can be done,
Let's bend all the rules to make,
Up details that are all fake.
We can tell all the Milnerities,
What we want and they will bite.
Because they paid for our campaign
And now have to live with the pain
I am truly a gift to the voter,
To promise them everything and renege on it later.
And have to break all the rules,
Just to have me look like a fool.
Hang in their folks as I have 2.5 left,
To screw up the Township as I only know best.
Regarding your poll about rural residents concerns about fire halls.
The halls are not plush but taxpayers are paying dearly for a service that was performed more than capably by the old system of paid call members. The wear and tear on vehicles at the full time hall will cost more in the short term than it did in many years of paid call service. The $200,000 fire trucks that used to only leave the hall when required are now "out in the area" (fire department language for driving around). This increases the fuel consumption and maintenance on these vehicles.....added to the start up cost of each full time hall.
Taxpayers voted for full time halls in the previous elections but did not understand the cost of such a decision. The paid call members are/were a dedicated and very well trained service.
Keep in mind that each full time hall has a crew of 4 members on a shift. Usually there is a member on holidays which leave you with a crew of 3. Standard operating procedures do not allow a 3 member crew to enter a burning building. As a result, the full time hall will have to call out the paid call members of the hall to assist. In the previous configuration, if your house was on fire and you called 911 you would have 10-25 firefighters respond to your location within 6-7 minutes. Now you would get 3-4 members within 3-5 minutes but they could not enter your home....then still wait another 6-7 minutes for support. What would you rather??? I hope my house doesn't catch fire......
We think you will agree that the face of Langley is changing rapidly and high-density developments require a prompt response to minimize damage. Not every building needs to be entered in order to fight a fire and swift response to a row of townhouses for instance, could save many lives.
Some people will also argue that using a vehicle instead of keeping it parked will actually extend the life of the apparatus and also cause problems to be identified quicker, thereby making for preventative maintenance. Other municipalities with full-time fire replace their vehicles on a standard schedule that is similar to the Township.
Few will argue that right now there is a place for paid call members, but there are also issue surrounding paid call. As we understand it, taxpayers could be paying for all 25 guys that turn up for a call, even though only 1-2 may be needed. There is also the issue of paid call personnel that are also Township employees. In the past those folks received pay from the Township when on a call, plus on-call pay.
We think that paid call firemen have operated for years in the Township and they are now offended and feel threatened by the full-time professional staff. I've heard that many resent the words "professional fire fighters" as well. The time to integrate full-time fire is not when the ToL has 160K+ people. It must start now and it has. The best scenario for all concerned is if both paid-call and full-time members were equally respected and each combined talents to work together for the good of the Township.
There will always be a transitional period between "paid on call" and "full time" firefighters.
With the density that TOL is building, the 6-7 minute wait is my prefered choice.
Anon makes good points.
Reading the Advance article today and Richter being quoted "we have to start differentiating between want and need"
My question to Richter...if this is what you are stating to the press " why did you put through the motion of the snow removal"...is this a want or is this a need.
You can't have it both ways. I wish the public would see this..she needs to be held accountable as do politicians in general.
I agree with OP......lets crunch the numbers and consider most residents of Langley were unaware of the paid call system because it worked so well.
$1,000 per week for 25 members in a paid call hall basing it on the average of 2 calls per week (you don't always get all 25 members responding but lets go with the max). No benefits etc.
$44,000 per full time hall in wages alone for a week. Not including IAFF benefits.
As per the "sour grapes" you feel the paid call members have. Not true in many cases. These members have careers, well paying occupations, good pensions that they've worked hard for and are not looking for a full time career in the department. They are paid call members that love their community and enjoy the firefighting. They realize that times are changing and they can't stop "progress" BUT do feel strongly that the Fire Chief, Mark Baken & council have discounted their dedication and skills leaving them with the desire to serve their community but told they are no longer contributing members of the fire service. These members have 25 years + experience and would be valuable training avenues but have been told "no thank you".
I also hope that I don't see fire trucks used to put up Liberal election posters/signs...........rumours are circulating.
You are right! Richter loves to pick from the menu but never pay the bill! Anybody have friends like that? Not for long eh! That's why Green is her only buddy on Council, the rest can see through her sillyness!
Stop, Stop, the song is too good to ruin with the visuals!
How do I read this poem without Bob Richter's explanation to read slowly for maximum affect?
Kooky Kim and Tricky Ricky deserve each other and in 2.5 years will deserve the major league whipping Fox and Bateman put on them. The community is behind the council.
Post a Comment