By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON July 6, 2011 The Great Waterfront Trail Adventure is an annual tour that travels the whole 720 km route over eight sensational days. Every single day of this fully supported tour includes the WOW Factor – the Wonderful Ontario Waterfront along the shores of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River.

Hundreds of Ontarians as well as people from the United States and Quebec take part in this event including Burlington’s Ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison and his partner.

Ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison arrives in Burlington on the first leg of his eight day adventure cycling from Niagara on the Lake to Riviere Baudette in Québec along the Waterfront Trail.

Each day Dennison is up at the crack of dawn to catch a GO train or drive to the location where the adventure picks up to drive the 45 to 100 km that is set out for a given day. Each ‘adventurer’ sets their own pace. The get together as groups or ride as pairs knowing that they will arrive at the destination for the day.

Because Dennison has responsibilities in Burlington at his health club and at Council meetings he become a sort of commuting adventurer for the first few days. But as the trip works its way east he will become a full time adventurer and the city and his business interests will have to wait.

July, 2008 was the inaugural year of the Great Waterfront Trail Adventure, an end to end tour of the Trail that welcomed the public.  In 2002, partners of the trail, including journalist Kate Harries, rode the length of the route and documented their journey in a series of articles that appeared in the Toronto Star.

Dennison takes a meal break in Mississauga on the second leg of hi eight day adventure rising the full 720 km length of the Waterfront Trail. “The beauty of this adventure is that you can stop when and where you like and relax over a beer and a meal” said Dennison. Are those Tour de France Yellow Jerseys?

“We had so much fun”, said Harries “that we decided to share the experience with as many people as we can. There is a true sense of pride and accomplishment in traveling along the entire 730 kms of the Waterfront Trail. There are now hundreds of what we call ‘end-to-enders’ who have done their own tours and had this unique experience of southern Ontario

The 2011 Route that Dennison is following is set out below with the day to day destinations shown on the map shown below.

The actual route these adventurers are taking is set out below.

Deputy mayor from Port Hope ; Mayor Parrish from Ajax; the current Mayor of Coburg and the former mayor of Coburn. Several of these gents are joining Dennison, who is on the far left, in the Great Waterfront Trail Adventure.

Each of the municipalities along the route have taken to providing a rest station and a certain amount of competition has developed between the municipalities to see who can be the most hospitable. Dennison, who is not exactly impartial, maintains that Burlington offered the best hospitality with people at the canal standing there early in the morning welcoming people into Burlington and directing them to the “butt” stop at Spencer Smith Park where fruit and juices were available. “Pickering came close to what Burlington had to offer but there was far more spirit in the people representing Burlington, Dennison reported to a Council meeting.

The Waterfront Trail is a project developed by former Mayor David Crombie who served as a one man Royal Commission that was to create a trail from one end of the province to the other along the shores of Lake Ontario. Crombie told a Burlington Waterfront Advisory Committee that Burlington was once a leader in the development of public spaces along the lake and that he hoped to see the city return to its prominence as a leader in making the lake accessible to the public.

What moves Dennison most as he cycles from community to community is the many occasions when he and his partner stop by the side of a road or take a break for a meal and gaze out over the lake and realize they gave been following the same body of water for a number of day. The aboriginal people who used the lake were very familiar with every creek and stream that fed into the lake but those of us who speed along the 401 and see glimpses of the body of water from time to time have no sense of what the lake means to us geographically or physiologically. It is only when you are near the water day in and day out that you realize the impact that body of water has on you.

For Dennison and his partner – there are new delights and insights every day. He just might come back to Burlington at the end of this adventure a changed man. But then again – the sights and delights of Quebec might get a grip on the man and we may never see him again.

[retweet]

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON July 5, 2011 – Marketers and advertisers “position” their products; they decide who they want to sell their soap or toothpaste to and then advertise and market the product to reach the market they have identified. Dove soap is marketed to one audience while Irish Spring is marketed to another.

Politicians do much the same thing, except that they are marketing themselves. Usually a politician will market themselves to as many people as they can in their ward. But if you’re a politician with a net that you want to cast a little wider – then you market yourself to a large audience. You do the same thing with your career. The difference between you and the politician is that the decisions they make are decisions you pay for.

She did it again – asked for a recorded vote on the motion to approve spending of an additional $5 million plus to complete the pier in her Ward. She voted against the spending but said she will support the decision and do everything she can to make sure the city doesn’t spend any more money.

Ward 2 councillor Marianne Meed Ward, who has never wavered from wanting to be Mayor of Burlington, takes positions on issues and asks for recorded votes that position her as a ward politician who is speaking for all the people of Burlington. Another step in the process of positioning herself as a possible mayoralty candidate in 2014 was her request for a recorded vote on the Committee report that came to Council for approval of the plan to spend an additional $5,798,000 to proceed with the completion of the Pier at the foot of Brant Street..

Meed Ward was the only member of Council to vote against the recommendation to approve an increase to $15.7 million to build the Pier from the original $9.6 million in the original approval. This despite being the person who moved adoption of the report at the Committee level, a move that surprised Ward 3 Councillor John Taylor.

Council meetings, as opposed to committee meetings, are pretty short events. Council is there to decide yea or nay on recommendations made at the committee level. Meed Ward moved that the report on the new cost of the Pier be adopted at the Committee level and one would assume that she would support a report she moved when it got to Council.

It all began when a crane on the construction site toppled over. Some say the crane operator was on his cell phone at the time talking to his girl friend. Things went downhill from there with the construction project. We don’t know how things went with the girl friend..

With Meed Ward saying she would not be supporting the recommendation every Council member weighed in on the issue. Councillor Sharman was blunt and direct when he said: “Fact, the city is not at fault here” and he went on to add: “Fact, we have known there would be increased costs and delays getting this Pier built since December of 2010. Fact, no proposals have come forward other than the proposal from the original contractors insurance company and that proposal was not acceptable. Sharman added that believed the city was doing what it had to do. Councillor Craven said he “was angry with the situation the city was in” and went on to say: “I think I know who is to blame … but we have to be very careful about what we say. Some day however, I will say it. For now modesty is the best approach.”

Craven added that Council meetings are public and the people we are suing watch the cable cast and read the media. “We need to be careful what we say.” Craven is obviously listening to the city’s lawyers.

Councillor Sharman cut to the chase when he said the facts are that the city has done nothing wrong. We owe it to the taxpayers to go forward with this.

Earlier in the meeting Councillor Jack Dennison pointed out that the city did nothing wrong. The contractor was on the site building a pier that the city had contracted to have done. The crane toppled”, explained Dennison, then there was a concrete pour that didn’t hold and then we learned that the steel used was under spec and that there were welds that did not meet specifications.

The contractor walked off the job when the city refused to increase the amount they had agreed to pay for the building of the pier. The dispute became a bit of an election issue but the public didn’t really have enough information at the time to decide how they really felt – but they thumped Mayor Jackson nevertheless and the city had a significantly different Council.

The city now had a royal mess on their hands. There was a partially constructed pier and a contractor who walked off the job. What was the city supposed to do? They had a real problem and the only resolution was to sue the contractor and the firm that designed the pier. The city also had to get the construction back in their hands. The contractor walks off the site but that doesn’t mean the city can just walk in and take over. The lawyers spell out the steps that have to be taken. They have to decide who exactly to sue. That got a little complicated because the firm that did the design work had been merged with a much larger firm. Then they have to figure out how much they are suing for and then engage legal counsel to handle the cases for them That took time and it has been expensive.

The crane accident was soon followed by a concrete pour that buckled some steel beams and revealed sub standard welding.. That’s when the arguments between the contractor, his sub contractors and the pier designers began – and then it all landed in the city’s lap when the contractor walked off the job.

How expensive ? We don’t know that yet but there will be a loud “ouch” when that figure gets released. Meed Ward believes there is an argument for releasing the legals costs now based on a court case heard recently in Kitchener. Interestingly Meed Ward didn’t issue a staff direction to look into what could be done to get those numbers. Maybe at another meting.

Since then, the city has realized that the dispute resolution process in the contract with the original contractor was not strong enough to allow the city to work out the problems without going to court. For that the city has to be faulted but it is certainly no reason to say the city should not proceed.

Mayor Goldring told Council that a citizen had suggested to him that the city not give the funds given to them by the federal government and the provincial government as well as the Region. THAT is not going to happen on this Mayor’s watch. “we have a moral obligation to return the funds and I don’t want to be part of a Council that plays funny games.”

We now know that Meed Ward doesn’t support the Council’s decision. What isn’t clear is what Meed Ward would do? She offered no course of action other than saying she couldn’t support the spending of more money – even though she had no problem with that decision at the committee level. Looks like a piece of political posturing to me

Meed Ward set out her position on her Facebook page when she said: “Council approves increased budget for pier 6-1. I did not support the re-tendering process because of the enhanced budget and timelines required, so did not vote in favour of the new budget. That said, now that we are on this path, my commitment is to do everything I can to ensure we stick to the new budget and timeline, and continue to release information to the public, including legal fees and staff time.”

Meed Ward dug out the numbers on staff time spent on the project but not charged back to the project. According to her information a total of 1249 hours – for a total of 31 weeks has been spent on this project by senior engineering staff. She now wants to know what the legal bill has come to as well.

Councillor Craven fully supports the Mayor’s leadership on the decision to press forward with the completion of the pier. He also cautions people to be careful what they say publicly; advises that the people we are suing listen.

Councillor Craven took issue with the stance Meed Ward had taken – claiming she supported the pier, but not the budget. “That’s a cop-out,” he said. “We’re all in this together.”

After council, in a comment to a reporter, Meed Ward said she was just being consistent in her position. “I did not support the re-tendering when it first came to a vote so I cannot now support the enhanced budget for re-tendering,” she said. “That is simply being consistent. He labels that a cop-out. I disagree.”

“We could” said Councillor Sharman, “be nice and take no action and allow the parties who are at fault walk away without being held accountable. The taxpayers would be left paying all the bills.”

The decision to proceed is now official and the completion of tender package preparations goes full tilt. Here is the timeline the city is working to:

• We now have a list of contractors.
• They will each be given the tender package.
• They will take that away and do all their number crunching and come back with their best number.
• The city will open the tenders and the lowest number gets the deal.

The city now has a couple of dicey weeks ahead of them. The engineering department, along with the consultants they have hired, pre-qualified 11 contractors who can submit bids to complete the construction of the pier. The city expects that the list will get winnowed down to eight contractors who will be given a tender package. The tender package has all the documents, plans, detailed specifications and anything else a contractor needs to know to be able to submit a bid – saying I will complete the construction of the Pier for xx dollars.

The contractors already know how much the city is prepared to spend – that’s now public information. Each contractor has to look at their costs and submit their best number to the city. The city is obliged to go with the lowest price – that’s what a tendering process is all about.

It was that tendering process that got us into the mess we are in now and many wonder why we are doing the same thing all over again. What’s different this time ? Before getting into the “this time” let me share with you some facts pulled together by my colleague Joan Little of the Spectator who wrote:

In August, 2005 (two councils ago), five bids were received, from $12.5 to $17.7 million; so back to the drawing board. The pier was downsized (again) to 180 metres, then 150, then 112 metres long and 7.5 metres wide, with a $6.2 million budget. The deck, previously steel-framed, was changed to pre-cast concrete.

Three bids, received from pre-qualified contractors in July, 2006, ranged up to $8.4 million. The lowest was from Harm Schilthuis of Ancaster, for $6,782,557.34, including GST, ($6,043,639 without, because municipalities get the GST rebated). So the 2006-2010 council approved about $450,000 extra to extend the length from 112 metres to 132.

The design incorporated 14 caissons, 1.4 metres in diameter, supporting a platform about 5 metres above the water, with a safety handrail, and a lighted beacon 80 metres from shore powered by a wind turbine that would also power the pier’s lights.

It had a floating dock at the end, with a capacity for docking commercial craft such as tour boats, and 22 fair-weather boat slips for day use. It was to open May, 2008, and we read regularly about a $500-per-day late penalty if the contract was not completed on time.

That was before all the problems and lawsuits.

Total financing — including design, engineering and construction — was $8,124,833. The Canada Ontario Infrastructure Program’s share was $4,356,230, Halton region’s $2,500,000, and Burlington Hydro’s $100,000, toward the wind turbine and power system, for a total $4,706,230 in grants from outside sources.

In August, 2008, during the first concrete pour, one of the main steel beams supporting the deck twisted. Two weeks later, a crane capsized onto the pier.

This was followed by blame games: The design was faulty; the contractor was at fault; the subcontractor was at fault.

The only ones who got rich since then were lawyers, as everyone sued everyone else. Zurich, the bonding company, would not pay, but this April made a proposal of some kind that council rejected. An update was provided at the last community services committee, but there has been so much “in camera” on this project that it’s hard to piece together the whole story, and the numbers.

The project is now different (smaller), more costly, and has four new consultants. New drawings are nearly complete for a revised pier, with a tender call scheduled for mid-July, closing mid-August, with the contract award late September. Completion would be the end of 2013.

Gone is the floating dock with the day slips. The report proposes ordering 12 new pier lights, because only nine of the original 12 had been received, (and may have been lost) and that design is no longer available, so can’t be matched. This raised the ire of Councillor Jack Dennison. Surely, he said, three new ones could be custom-made more cheaply than buying 12 new. Also unresolved is the design of 1.4-metre-high safety railings on the pier.

A short promenade extension (inadvertently omitted from the original contract) is included. Several extras will be quoted separately and, budget permitting, may be added. These include a promenade extension, a mini-ramp to the beach, and a small floating dock. Updated permits are required from Conservation Halton, Transport Canada, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and federal department of fisheries and oceans. And now there’s talk of buying a water lot.

The additional funding of $5,798,000 needed brings the overall pier budget to $15,070,000. The report speaks of possible recoveries from the performance bond and other litigation. (In my lifetime?) Interestingly, unlike for other projects, staff time is not included, nor are legal costs. (Councillor Marianne Meed Ward will be asking for legal costs to be released publicly, following a recently released three-judge court decision ordering Waterloo to do so). Thank you for that Joan. Joan Little is a former Burlington alderman and Halton councillor.

Councillors are rightly concerned about the prequalification of contractors. This was done last time, and what, they asked, have you done since that will ensure better results? The reply was that prequalification had been “rather cursory” last time, and this time up to eight contractors would be rigorously checked.

Well, there are a number of things that are very different. This time the city got the technical help it needed to specify details and they now have a dispute resolution procedure that is sound and they pre-qualified each of the contractors and now know that whoever comes in with the best price is well qualified to do the job. So – things are different this time around.

But here is where the rubber begins to hit the road. What does the city do if the best price is higher than the amount the city has budgeted and higher than the cost of giving back the money we were given and demolishing the pier as it now stands ?

Possible, but the contractors can read without moving their lips and they know what the city is up against. We can expect that several of the contractors will come in under the budgeted number – and remember, if there are two bids that are just ten cents apart – the lower price gets the job. That’s what a tender is.

The city must accept the lowest bid. That is when the city Council and its administration will breath a very deep sigh of relief and begin listening to the sound of jack hammers coming from the sorry site that has plagued this city through tree administrations.

Council is doing the right thing. Councillor Dennison pointed out that if the city is to have any hope of recovering any of their costs related to the two lawsuits now before the Courts it has to complete the construction of the pier.

Dennison also pointed out that the city is not likely to recover all their losses but one can expect that at some point the lawyers on each side of this dispute will have looked at all the facts and realized that there is no benefit to anyone to take this case to a full trial and there will be a settlement.

Councillor Dennison correctly points out that any settlement is going to be for cents on the dollar – he suggested something between 20 cents and 75 cents – only time will reveal what that amount is. But unless there is a serious flaw in the city’s case – and that we don’t know because we have no idea what the lawyers are up to.

Councillor Lancaster said the public doesn’t have half the story about the pier. She didn’t offer to say what the half we don’t know is about. So much for transparency.

Councillor Lancaster said as much when she commented at Council that the “taxpayers don’t know half the story”. Her approach to municipal politics is that Council is there to make decisions based on the information they have and Lancaster doesn’t feel much of that information has to be shared with the public.

The lawyers for the design firm and the contractor the city is suing aren’t going to do anything to move the case along until the pier is under construction and they may choose to finagle and delay until the pier is actually built – but at some point the city will recover at least some of the money. We just have to be patient and stay the course. The city motto has it right when it says: “Stand By”

That doesn’t mean everyone isn’t going to sweat it a bit – but we have a Mayor with that sense of certitude that will carry the day and one cannot help but notice that, except for Meed Ward, who after all wants his job, the rest of the Council members are with the Mayor on this one. Councillor Craven said, and this is unusual for him: “I will continue to support the Mayor’s leadership”

We will know where we are by the end of August. And then we can relax and let the construction begin. Between now and then – everyone is holding their breath.

The Mayor, perhaps being more hopeful and in wishing mode, said we “have one more Sound of Music and one more Canada Day ahead of us and then we will have our Pier and be proud of what we have done.” And he might have added – you can then reelect me to a second term of office and, if that Pier does open in the summer of 2013, this Mayor and every Council member is a shoo in for re-election. But in the world of politics a week is a year and one never knows what will happen.

Retweet]

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON July 1, 2011 – To fully appreciate what it is to be, or to become, a Canadian citizen, one had only to listen to Peter Appleyard as he led people about to be made Canadian citizens during a Citizenship Court assembled in Spencer Smith Park on Canada Day

Peter Appleyard was born in England and came to Canada in 1951 and enjoyed a very full career as a musician. In 1992 he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada.

An immigrant to Canada in 1951, Peter Appleyard went on to enjoy considerable success as a musician and in 1992 was made an Officer of the Order of Canada. Appleyard led 31 new Canadians through a Citizenship Court session in Spencer Smith Park.

On an absolutely glorious day filled with sunshine, standing at the edge of Lake Ontario where one of the great aboriginals built a home that we now use as a museum, thirty one people became citizens of Canada. Appleyard must have wondered as he conducted the Citizenship Court what those assembled before him would go on to become as they were made citizens.

Appleyard said to those assembled:

I am pleased to welcome you to this Court of Canadian Citizenship. I welcome those of you who will shortly become New Canadian citizens and also your families and friends.

Today is a very important milestone in your life. On this occasion you will be given the most valuable gift from Canada – Canadian citizenship.

Canadian citizenship has only been in existence since 1947, but the spirit that gives Canadians their special identity has lived since the early days of confederation..

The process of nation building stated with confederation. It started with people of different races, cultures and languages, agreeing on a form of government and a legal system whereby people could live and work together in harmony. They laid the foundation for the carving of a new country from the forest and the vast prairie. They laid the foundation so that we can be here today.

Former Ontario Lt. Governor Lincoln Alexander was a guest at the Citizenship Court and joined the 31 people becoming citizens along with their guests during a renewal of their Oath of Allegiance.

I know that for many of you the journey to the Court room has not been easy. Some of you had to escape from war torn homelands. Some had to leave friends and family members behind Some of you had to uproot professions an start all over again; while others have experienced great difficulties in adapting to a new life in Canada.

However your presence here confirms to us that you have the courage and the wisdom to make the necessary adaptations and that you have made a conscious decision in favour of Canada. Now Canada has declared in favour of you, and today you will join us as citizens with all the attendant rights, privileges and responsibilities.

Citizenship implies the possession of an ideal; a sense of values; and a theory of what life in Canada might become. It takes in the whole scale of thought, knowledge and behavior.

Citizenship in Canada is not just a technical qualification for voting for getting a passport, or for qualifying for some employment. It is not a prize for new arrivals. It is a right and responsibility for all of us. What becomes of this country and of us depends on each persons own idea of citizenship – multiplied nearly 29 million times.

Today you are publicly making a commitment to the future of Canada. As citizens of this country you will become partners in exercising the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. You will now become shareholders in a larger world. How you act, what you do or what you do not do can effect the live of countless people now and in the future.

We effect lives by the way we participate in the community and the country we now enjoy, and that one day we will pass on to another generation. Commitment therefore to the values that underlie our Canadian citizenship needs thought and care so that the values are not lost through careless indifference.

In a few moment you will take the oath of Canadian citizenship. In it you will promise to be loyal and bear true allegiance to her majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada. Next you will promise that you will faithfully observe the laws of Canada. Finally, you will promise to fulfill your duties as Canadian citizens.

After being sworn in, the 31 New Canadians were given their Certificates of Citizenship and greeted warmly by Mike Wallace, MP, Joyce Savoline, MPP, Gary Carr, Chair of the Region of Halton and Rick Goldring, Mayor of Burlington – and then bid welcome to Canada by a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

But what are you really saying? I hope you are saying that you want to belong to the Canadian family, that you want to be a member of a society, a citizen of a country which looks forward, toward the future, but does not forget from where they have come; a society which protects with pride and preserves with care their past traditions and accomplishments.

I hope that you want to be a citizen of a country where you are equal with all other citizens, where you have equal treatment under the law to freedom of speech, freedom to worship, freedom from persecution and the right to protection against discrimination. That it will be your responsibility to protect those rights, to cherish ands safeguard them against any who would abuse them, remembering always that the protection of your rights begins with the protection of those of your neighbours

That your responsibility is to contribute to understanding and harmony between yourselves and your fellow citizens whether it be in your public and professional life or in the simple courtesies and considerations of everyday life.

Such responsibilities and such rights are ours to exercise every day of our lives and the degree to which we do so plays a major role in the continuing development of a Canada founded upon fairness and dignity for all her members. If ever there was a time in this nation’s history when responsibilities play an important role, the time is now. As a country, we are facing great challenges. Challenges that will surely affect our lives now and in the future.

The essence of our citizenship is found in its values; its moral commitments; its deep loyalties.

This might be a good time for all Canadians to look again at the values and principles which have been associated with Canada, for ti is these vital principles that have earned Canada the reputation as clearly one of the best countries in the world in which to live.

Now, as you prepare to assume your new rights and privileges freely and proudly, I hope that you will make a conscious decision to add your talents, your strengths, your dreams and your hopes to the great treasure trove which is your Canadian heritage so that together we can build an even better Canada.

I trust you will reflect on this as you take the oath of Canadian citizenship.

Canada Day 2011 was as good as the weather gets in Ontario during the summer. A light breeze with ice cream and hot dogs available for the hungry and various service available to others. A free health test was obviously of interest to one young man.

At that point in the ceremonies the thirty one new Canadians were sworn in and made Canadian citizens. Appleyard invited everyone in attendance to use the occasion to renew their oath and the audience was joined by former Ontario Lt. Governor Lincoln Alexander who raised his hand and renewed is oath of allegiance to a country he has served so well.

Spencer Smith Park was filled with the usual merchants selling ice cream and hot dogs and offering various services.

That day was rounded out with a performance of The Spoons and a spectacular fireworks display.

[retweet]

By Staff

BURLINGTON, ON June 30, 2011 – The Halton Region Health Department tests recreational water throughout the Region and wants you to know that the Beachway Park North and Beachway Park South in Burlington are safe to swim in The water testing is done weekly.

Prospect Park Old Beach and Bronte Park Beach are UNSAFE for swimming.

With the kids out of school this afternoon – the Moms of the Region now have a safe place to take them. Think the water is going to be kind 0f cold though.

[retweet]

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON June 28, 2011 – Fourteen people in the room; half of them type A talkers, the other half bright people who will have to implement what the group is talking about. This is how the Strategic Plan for Burlington is being put together and it is an amazing process that we will write about at much greater length later in the week.

Each of the three group facilitators used flip charts to capture the thoughts of the fourteen participants at the seventh half day session to create the Burlington Strategic Plan.

Last night, that would be Monday evening, four woman toiled into the wee hours to pull some order out of more than 25 sheets of flip chart pages that were generated by three groups talking about part of the Strategic Plan. Led by Michelle Dwyer, who works under the Direction of Alan Magi, Helen Walihura, Donna Woods and Amanda Gubbels took away the pages and started sorting out the comments that the three facilitators had written up.

Watching a group of people craft a long term think plan for the city is quite something. This was their seventh half day meeting. (I can hear someone saying ‘seven half days – I could have done that in a couple of hours’) during which they struggled with just what it meant to have a Strategic Plan and how do you craft the document so that it has meaning and relevance to the taxpayers and the staff that have to make it happen.

Georgina Black of KPMG consulting with a colleague during one of the Burlington Strategic Planning sessions. The Strategic Plan team is ably led by Ms Black – one of the best in the business.

The Strategic Planning Team has been working under the very able guidance of Georgina Black, brought in from KPMG, an international consulting firm, to help them understand just what a Strategic Plan was and how it had to be developed and then linked to the city’s budget process.

Each of the politicians had their vision, wish, dream for the city they represented at Council and each of the senior staff members had departments that had to carry out and implement what was decided upon and keep it all within a budget the taxpayers would live with.

Michelle Dwyer staff liaison team leader for the Strategic Planning group watches during a session while Helen Walihura listens intently to catch the thinking of the group she was working with.

Burlington had entered a new phase as a city. The Shape Burlington Report changed the way thinking people reacted. The report told both the politicians and the administration that people wanted a change. They wanted more access, they wanted to be involved and they wanted to be listened to, and while they were prepared to spend a little money they didn’t want to see taxes going sky high. The city had just dumped a Mayor and one Council member and elected three new people to Council and made it very clear they wanted things to be done differently. There had been significant tax increases that most felt were to high which made both politicians and the administration keenly aware that they were being watched.

The city had a new Mayor who was experiencing a sometimes jolting on the job training experience and struggling with a pier that was a contractual nightmare that he knew he had to deal with.

Donna Woods focuses on her flip chart as she uses colours to show different levels of comment. Woods, along with three other woman, then take the 25 plus flip chart pages and make sense out of the notes for review the next day.

All this shortly after the city realized it had a significant surplus that came to the surface near the end of the year and surprised many on Council who have made it clear that they don’t like surprises.

This Council is much different from the previous one. They work well together for the most part. There are differences of opinion and some nerves get rubbed raw a bit at times but they are certainly a different team that the 2005-2010 Council.

Which explains a large part of why the Mayor is determined to get a Strategic Plan in place an dm make it meaningful, relevant and something the taxpayers will buy into. Your city council and the staff you pay with your tax dollars are doing a significantly different job.

Amanda Gubbels, a part of the support team that captured all the thoughts and ideas that will result in a long term Strategic Plan that will go out for public review and comment late in the summer. Gubbels listens as Steve Zorbas makes a point

What the focus on in this piece though is the four woman who handle all the paper work and produce the working documents that guide the Council members and senior staff members through the half day sessions.

Staff met last Friday and produced thoughts and ideas and suggestions for directions. The team of four woman worked through the weekend and had the documents on the table for the Monday morning session and then at noon they trudged back to city hall to pull together the next level of reporting.

Members of Council and senior staff gathered for more than seven half days sessions to work though a Strategic Plan. that looks 20 years + into the future and ties what they think can be done in the next three and a half years into the budget. In this picture, Councillor Mead Ward and city Manger Roman Martiuk talk while Michelle Dwyer listens and takes notes.

Taking down data from the flip chart sheets they collected, collated and produced the document needed by noon of the next day when it got passed along to the KPMG facilitator who reviews it, discusses it with Alan Magi and Council members and gives it her wink and nod and – with the inevitable corrections and re-formatting the Team of woman make the last minute changes and have documents in front of everyone for 9 am Wednesday.

That folks is your tax dollars at work – and on this one – you are getting full value for your money.

[retweet]

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON June 28, 2011 _ Soon, very, very soon – this Wednesday in fact Brenda Heatherington will go to the front of the room and give the public a Sneak Peak of the inaugural season for the Burlington Performing Arts Centre.

Expect the Burlington Teen Tour Band – but what else ? Drama? Jazz ? Concerts ? Heatherington has deep experience and an enviable reputation and did stellar work in Edmonton.

Brenda Heatherington, Ex Dir of BPAC is front and center now with the fall line up

How will Heatherington find the balance between what the public will immediately like and buy tickets for and at the same time gently nudge a public that hasn’t had access to all that much culture: the bash em, smash em truck events in Hamilton don’t count.

Will we learn that local small theatre has taken to the new centre ? Will we learn that there is going to be a Nutcracker Suite this Christmas ? Last weekend there was a National Academy Orchestra out of Hamilton that put on a stunning performance of Beethoven’s Violin Concerto played by Laurence Kayaleh that played to a full house that had extra seats set up in the aisle at St. Christopher’s Anglican Church. The appetite for significant cultural events is certainly there – will the BPAC people fully understand their community and both cater to what they want and at the same time develop appetite for music and drama they’ve not heard or seen before.

Up until now all the city has heard is that the build of the Centre is “on budget and on time” and that we have to wait for the program to be announced.

And so now the moment has come. Let’s see what they can do.

[retweet]

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON June 27, 2011 Joseph Brant Memorial Hospital (JBMH) was ranked dead last in a listing of wait times at Ontario hospitals.

Ninety percent of the sickest patients spent up to 25.2 hours in the Burlington hospitals emergency room in April of this year before being discharged or admitted. That’s the longest total ER wait time for seriously ill patients at any Ontario hospital measured that month. It is virtually identical to the 26 hour statistic that JBMH reported in 2009.

The problem, according to hospital officials isn’t the ER, it’s the lack of beds. Officials report that JBMH has many acute care beds ‘clogged’ with older patients who no longer need hospital care but must wait for beds to open up in a long term care facility or nursing home.

With the beds in the upper levels of the hospital clogged with patients who don’t have long term care homes to go to – patients get held in emergency leading to JBMH having the longest wait times in the province.

One might understand that a problem was identified in 2009 when data was collected – but that was two years ago. It is really unacceptable for the hospital to say that they are still struggling. That’s somebody’ Mother ‘clogging’ up that bed if you don’t mind.

Burlington’s city council has set aside more than $4 million in a reserve fund that will be given to the hospital when it’s development plans get approval – what’s the delay ?

The city that was ranked as the third best in the country to live in and then the second best to raise a family in is now the city with the longest wait times to get a hospital bed in. Patients are left in the ER because there are no beds available for them elsewhere in the hospital.

JBMH has pitched a $300 million redevelopment a pan to the province that would add at least 70 acute care beds. Hospital officials are said to be “hoping” for approval for their plan which calls for the additional beds to be in place by 2013 or 2014 – but added that the beds are needed now.

There is something wrong with a process that allows the province to drag their feet as much as they have when the city had bellied up to the bar and put their money on the table.

There hasn’t been a word from our MPP; Savoline is packing her bags for her trip to the land of happy retirement which she has earned, if not for her work on behalf of the city at Queen’s Park then for her work at the Regional level where she made some very significant and important changes.

The Mayor and a couple of the council members were recently at Queen’s Park sitting in on a presentation to stop any highway across the escarpment. It would have been nice to see them all banging their shoes on the table while they were there and demanding to know what the province was going to do about getting along with the hospital development proposal. But this is Burlington and we are polite. Tell that to the person who waits more than 25 hours for a bed at the hospital.

We are about to get into the serious part of a provincial election – an opportunity for citizens to ask some hard questions of this government and to challenge the Liberal candidate to who happens to have a lot of experience on different JBMH Boards. Press Karmel Sakran, the Liberal candidate hard and ask tough questions. What would he do to bring about a change? What kind of a plan does he have to lobby the health Ministry and how much research has he done.

During the election campaign Burlington needs to hear what each of the political parties has in the way of a plan that is specific to Burlington.

The government is certainly aware of just how unhappy voters are. A recent report produced by an organization known as MASS LBP, an organization that has done some good work in Burlington when they did much of the public survey grunt work for the Shape Burlington people and also did some work with Rick Goldring when he was Council member in Ward 5. MASS LBP (the LBP stands for Led by People) has also done work for the Region and is recognized around the world as a leader in the field of getting the views of a large community thro9ugh what they call their “civic lottery”; an approach that sends letters out to people who were randomly selected and invites them into intensive workshops were a lot of questioning and debating takes place. This intensive, digging deeply into the way people think produces a much finer more detailed response than a simple opinion poll. MASS is particularly strong in the public health field and are known around the world as a significant force in the collecting of data and then analyzing the data for policy makes to use.

We mention this organization and want to pass on to you some of the findings that came out of the recent research work MASS did in the health care field. The full report is available at https://www.waittimealliance.ca/

After three weekends filled with lively and lengthy discussions the panelists reached the following consensus. How do they compare with your thinking ? What would you do with these results ?

1. Step up Prevention and Promotion. Direct a share of alcohol and tobacco taxes towards health promotion. Expand nutrition and phys-ed in schools, more public education on active living, better food labeling.

2. Improve Accountability and Incentives. Link compensation for physicians to measurable patient outcomes and satisfaction, encourage health professionals to form interdisciplinary primary health teams, expand reporting in hospitals that measure quality and patient satisfaction.

3. Strengthen Community Care. Requires strengthening of partnerships, mobilization of volunteers, creation of patient and community support groups, reduce cyclical funding constraints, prepare for an aging population with new resources for community services that keep people at home.

4. Expedite eHealth and improve information-sharing. Communicate the importance of eHealth while addressing access and privacy issues.

5. Improve Access and Timeliness. Expand family health team models. Utilize nurse practitioners more widely in primary care clinics and emergency departments, and develop a centralized specialist referral system.

Do the results of the survey work done by MASS LBP reflect the way people in Burlington feel? If they do – what is being done by people at the hospital to bring about the changes the public wants ? Is the hospital communicating effectively with the community ? Is the community being effectively served by the hospital? These are all questions that can and should be part of the public debate we are about to get into as part of the up coming provincial election.

The JBMH hospital Executive Director, Ed Vandewall does get out to meet with people; just doesn’t seem to be able to get to community meetings. The above was a SNAP photo of Eric at a fund raising event.

It is something to watch a city council be very proactive and resolute in setting aside money in a budget surplus and dedicate it to hospital development and at the same time commit a portion of municipal taxes for at least the next ten years to the development of the hospital. In all my time at city committee and council meetings I’ve yet to see anyone from the hospital address Council. I know of at least one council member who had arranged for the Executive Director of the hospital to appear at a Ward meeting but that got cancelled at the last minute because he was summoned to Queen’s Park to meet with the minister. We’ve not seen any public report or news release from the hospital saying what was talked about.

We have some serious health services problems in this province and in Burlington, where the population is already skewed towards an aging population. Burlington is a “move to” destination for many seniors who want a quiet, safe community that they can spend their retiring years in. We are a safe city with plenty of community services for those who can afford the housing. The city is certainly doing its part. The hospital, which has administrative staff that earn much more than many people at city hall and a load more than our Council members.

Some changes needed and a serious reality check as well.

[retweet]

By Staff

BURLINTON, ON June 27, 2011 Jane McKenna, a Burlington entrepreneur announced she would seek the Progressive Conservative nomination for the Burlington seat in the provincial legislature that is vacant now that Joyce Savoline has ended her term.

Long time Burlington resident, and currently the Director of New Business Development for PLAY Advertising, Jane is also an entrepreneur, recently launching her own company, Rainmaker Consulting.

The Tory standard bearers came out for McKenna in her announcement. “She is a born leader, an amazing promoter and truly a ‘dog with a bone’ on any project she takes on,” said Kathy Thomas, owner of the Bronze Frog Gallery and President of the Rotary Club of Burlington Central. “If Jane can’t get it done … it can’t be done.”

A ward 1 candidate in the last municipal election McKenna has decided to move higher up the food chain and seeks the Burlington Progressive Conservative nomination. So far she is running against Brian Heagle who has been patiently waiting for an opportunity to rub the Liberal red off his hide.

Mike Wallace, MP Burlington: “Jane McKenna is an intelligent, hard-working and high energy individual. I have known her for many years. She is an active and valuable volunteer in our community. Jane understands the needs of families and small business in Burlington. She will be a dynamic and effective voice for Burlington at Queen’s Park.”

Keith Strong: “Jane is a hardworking individual who always finishes what she starts. She is a dedicated professional who works well alone, but she is also an excellent team player. Jane leads by example. I am proud to have worked with Jane.”

There are now two announced progressive Conservative candidates for the Burlington seat. The Liberals nominated Karmel Sakran and the NDP nominated Peggy Russell.

[retweet]

By Pepper Parr

BURLINGTON, ON June 24, 2011 – The Council Committee that accepted a report on the status of the Brant Street Pier did struggle with the information in the report and the process the city administration was going through – it wasn’t a pretty picture.

Some background: The humongous amount that has been put on the table is the city’s guestimate as to what it is going to cost to complete the Pier, or put another way, it is the amount the city is prepared to pay to have the job completed.

Not much work done recently – and we won’t see any work done until the fall – and even then there won’t be people on the Pier with hammers and drills. Expect them on site in the Spring of 2012 – if the taxpayers haven’t run Council out of town.

Several Council members wondered why the city would say what it is prepared to pay before they ask contractors to bid. One might expect the contractors who are going to bid to offer to do the job for just what the city said it is willing to pay.

City Manager Roman Martiuk explained that “it is the practice for cities to say what they have budgeted so that the construction industry knows we are serious.”

Tom Eichenbaum explained that the consultants involved in the prequalification work are winnowing down a list of 11 contractors who have expressed interest and will come up with a list of eight contractors who will be given a tender package.

It will look just great when it is finished – now if we can find a way to get through the complaints that are going to come flooding in between now and then. The Mayor has visions of Fireworks from the Pier on Canada Day and during the Sound of Music in 2013.

A tender package is the document sets out in minute detail what it is the city wants to buy from them. The contractors take that document and have six weeks to come back with their best offer for the job. The city will review the tenders and is then required to give the job to the contractor who comes forward with the lowest price. Will any one of the contractors that decide to tender come in below what the city has said it has budgeted? There are eight of them competing for the job and if they want it they have to have the lowest price. You know where the price is going to come in don’t you? Car dealers do it to you all the time – they call them “upgrades”.

What was interesting to watch during committee discussion was how little several of the Council members knew about the tendering process – and that includes the Mayor. They had all kinds of questions – which was good – but it might have been better had the asked for a Workshop to get fully briefed. It would have been fine with us if they had gone into closed session to do that.

Our troubles began the day the crane went over and it has been angst and financial grief ever since.

The city engineer, Eichenbaum, made a comment that we found astounding. He said that he was marginally involved with the selection of the contractor the first time around and that it was “fairly cursory” process and no one picked him up on it. To be fair the city had done work with Harm Schilthuis and Sons before and they perhaps felt that they could trust this company to complete the job. The forgot that Ronald Regan phrase: “Trust but verify.”

Well they are certainly verifying this time around and at considerable expense to the city given the cost of the two consulting firms brought in to see the engineering department through this situation, We don’t know yet what that additional cost is going to be nor do we know what the legal costs are going to amount to. Given the way our legal department tends to hide things we may never know.

Mayor Goldring wanted to be certain that we were not about to make another mistake because this is now on his plate, so he asked that there be a Staff Direction to review the tender process so that Council can “quantify and review the differences between what we did last time and what we are doing this time.” Those are questions the Mayor could have asked when he was the Council member for Ward 5.

The way city committees work is to react to reports that come from Staff. Mayor Goldring moved that the report be accepted along with its recommendations. In doing so he commented that “we are not out of the woods by any stretch”.

Part of what is going to keep this Council in the woods, and probably the woodshed with the taxpayers, is the discussion that took place around adding features to the Pier. You read that right – ADDING features – but only if they can be added without any additional costs. It seems people at City Hall believe there really is a free lunch.

Mother nature created this nice little beach for us – and now the engineers want to construct a stairway from the deck to the water level. Why not just open up the anchor chain on the Promenade to the water level. What will you bet that there is an insurance reason for not being able to do that?

Here is what they want to add. Again,, some background. Many people thought there would be provision and a place for people to tie up their boats. Nope, that was not in the plan. However, when the base part of the Pier was built the flow of water changed and the result is a small strip of sandy beach on the western side of the Pier right next to the beginning of the Spencer Park Promenade.

That was a bit of a bonus Mother Nature gave us and the engineers have decided that it would be “nice” to have a small ramp from the top main deck of the Pier down to this small Beach and they drew into a set of plans what they had in mind. They did add that this would only be done if the bid from the contractor was within the budget the city has established. It seems that for city people the objective is to spend all the money and not come in well under the budget and effect a savings.

Councillor Jack Dennison made a significant point when he said “nobody can spend money like a municipality”. Well, Dennison and his six colleagues are the Council and they can, and in this instance, should say no.

There are some design problems with the Pier that is going to be built. They are small but they offer some insight into how this project was handled first time around. There are concerns with the height of the guard rail and the space at the bottom of the guard rail – they don’t want some toddler slipping through the edge and into the water some twenty feet below. Council committee got right down into the weeds on this one with Councillors Taylor and Dennison talking about how “kick plates” could be put in.

The Pier was supposed to have “iconic” lights but a) there aren’t enough of them; b) they don’t make them anymore and we need at least three more and c) no one is sure where the ones we are supposed to have actually are. Figure that one out.

The other problem was with the light standards which are apparently “iconic” – a much over used word these days. Twelve are needed and there are only nine and – are you ready for this – they don’t make them any more.

It gets better – they really don’t know where the original nine are. The hope is that they are somewhere – this is beginning to sound like a version of the Keystone Cops.

The engineers thought a floating dock would be nice and they have just the place to put it. Dennison wants a much less expensive dock. Can we afford one at all?

And there is more. The engineers want to put in a floating dock along side that natural beach that Mother Nature gave us and have talked to a company who has “just the thing” for us. Councillors Taylor and Dennison wanted to know why the city couldn’t get something similar to what Barangas on the Beach has in place. “It’s been there for years” explained Dennison. “I was looking at it recently and it’s just fine and it sits out on the lake and not tucked away in the lee of the Pier where it would be protected.” The engineers thought the city should have something a little more “substantial”. Dennison was right – they do know how to spend your money.

More yet folks. Turns out that the small stretch of land from the shore side end of the Pier to the beginning of the promenade wasn’t included in the original plan so something has to be done there and the thinking amongst the engineers was that a pathway identical in material to that used on the promenade should be built from the shore edge right up to the sidewalk level on Lakeshore. These are what Meed Ward used to call “nice to have’s” when she was running for Council.

When all these pretty little additions were being talk about there wasn’t a single word of indignation from Council – not even from Councillor Sharman, who does indignation real good.

Back to the money. The original funding sources for the $9,272,033. project budget was as follows

Senior government funding                              $4,356,230

Region of Halton                                                 $2,500,000

Burlington Hydro                                                $   100,000

Debentures                                                           $    423,639

Park Development Charges Reserve Fund    $      46,000

Park Dedication Reserve Fund                         $    242,964

Capital Purposes Reserve Fund                       $1,603,200

It is doubtful that Mike Wallace would succeed in getting the federal government to just forget about the money they gave us if we tore the Pier down – but what the heck – it wouldn’t hurt to ask. I mean we did return a Conservative to office, so they do owe us something.

The Region of Halton isn’t going to give us a break – if they did all the other municipalities in the Region would want the same break. I suppose if we said they had to have a Pier before they could get a break – naw that’s not going to work..

We own Burlington Hydro so maybe they would just write it off in return for our running their logo on the city web site.

Debentures: At least once a year the city, through the Region goes to the market to raise funds for specific projects. The Pier was one of the projects and that’s where this $423,639. came from. Maybe we should have gotten more?

The $46,000 we got from the Park Development Charges Reserve Fund, maybe they could just bury the amount and forget it. Same with the $242,964 and the $1,603,200 they was taken from different reserve funds. It’s our money so we can’t give it back to ourselves – can’t someone in accounting just erase the number from the ledger or cover it with white out. Isn’t that what accountants do? So, perhaps all is not lost

But it isn’t over yet – all the Committee did was accept the report – it does go to a full Council meeting July 4, where the final decision gets made. Will hundreds of annoyed taxpayers show up and demand that the city get real.

[retweet]