Miss Vicky's Offhand Remarks

I've been waiting for this post based on the rumours flying around... keenly awaiting your advice for mobilization!

Yes indeed, let's mobilize. I understand that our local MPP is positioning to assist people who want to appeal thier property tax assessments as well.

The city's draft 2009 budget will be tabled Nov 4. We'll see what that says about Phase 2. Public consultations will be in November and then council will debate the budget between Dec 1 and 5. In the meantime, we'll try and get as much info as possible so we can see how much truth there is in the rumours that are currently flying (BTW the one about Phase 1 going over budget is not true).

As for property assessments, glad to hear our MPP will lend a hand with appeals. I'll be posting more about this in the coming days, as my notice sinks in...

I've got no problem canceling this as a result of the current economic situation, as long as it's slated to be picked right back up again first thing after we're out of the slump.

Back in August of this year, the city of Ottawa received $77 million in provincial funds for new infrastructure and, earlier in May, it had set aside a record $360 million. On top of this, there’s a two per cent property tax levy dedicated to provide an additional $120 million over the next three years.

[Edited By JMG Oct 28, 2008 07:35 PM]

Yep. And it's all going to last year's snow clearing and increased gas and concrete prices

If I save for a vacation in Hawaii and then lose my job, should I still go to Hawaii because that's what I had the money allotted for? Or spend the vacation money on things like food and rent?

My wife and I are already budgeting as though I've lost my job. We're cutting out as much extras as we can. I think it's advisable that everyone do the same right now - individuals and governments.

I'm sure the city will be hit by this recession just like everyone else. We simply can't expect business as usual. That's unrealistic - even frivolous. Cuts are going to have to happen somewhere. And probably some pretty deep ones. That's just simply the reality of the situation we're in right now.

This has nothing to do with the recession and everything to do with decisions regarding the budget that Council made last year, before the financial crisis even started.

If it was from last year why do we just know about it now? I'm not trying to be difficult - I honestly don't know. I'm not sure how this is any different from my Hawaii example. Whatever may have been planned last year (vacation to Hawaii), the fact is we are in a very serious crises right now and likely to be in it for some time to come. I know many people haven't felt it personally yet, but that will come soon enough. Unfortunately.

I really want that work done. I just don't think this is necessarily a good time for it unless the infrastructure is truly "crumbling", which I'm guessing it is not. Another year or two probably won't hurt.

Now, back to the original post, I do find it pretty crappy that we are getting hit with the highest tax assessments - basically funding the urban sprawl. So there is considerable merit to the notion that this work should bloody-well get done as soon as possible. I just don't necessarily agree to the definition of "ASAP" :-)

This article explains the budget issue

governments can be (and often are) counter-cyclical to mitigate the effects of a recession. Increasing gov't spending in a recession makes more sense than most people realise. The government might as well build a few more bridges and provide jobs during a recession rather than wait until labour is scarce. In any case, Wellington, phase two has *nothing* to do with the current state of global financial affairs. The road is in horrible shape and needs to be redone.

not just the road - the outdated infrastructure needs upgrading... and if we are going to increase density in the downtown core, it doesn't make sense to defer these projects

Maybe the city should be run like a business.

But seriously.

Why did O’Brien sing a much different tune about infrastructure renewal only six months ago?

Hey, is that the Hintonburg Pizza, Pizza in the background?

[Edited By JMG Oct 29, 2008 09:35 AM]

Thanks, I'll read the article. adavidso, your last sentence does not follow form the one previous to it (nor vice-versa). You present them as though the latter is concluded from the former, but the two statements have nothing to do with each other. I'm not questioning that the work needs to be done.

In any case, I'll read the article and come back to ask questions if need be. Or poke holes :-)

"Going to Hawaii" doesn't stop water line ruptures under the streets or stop raw sewage from flowing into the Ottawa River during a storm (ahem).

And it doesn't provide a much-needed boost to the merchants of HIntonburg by preventing streets and sidewalks from decaying even further.

INVESTMENT IN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE.

I say cancel a suburban highway widening first.

Thanks Miss Vicky for the pointer to the Citizen article on the budget. Damn I can't understand these things....I too want the project to contiue. I don't get it that some things can be moved around in the budget to cover shortages, etc. and some things can't be moved around. For example...I find it distressing re the public housing that CBC cameras showed...disgusting shape many of these are in. That would be an example of where I would do that first, and then finish our neighbourhood project second. But that is just where I am sure I get mixed up, because there supposedly is not a way that the money could be used for the public housing...right? I apologize ahead of time for my lack of knowledge here. Generally what I see is that there are years of planning and promises and they go up in smoke, and here it is again with our own plan. That to me, is the real issue...the way things are committed to and then revoked. I wish I had gone to that meeting where I could get explanations first hand, maybe.

Yes, as I mentioned above, if the infrastructure is truly crumbling to that extent, then it should be replaced immediately. But I doubt it's a matter of needing it this year vs next year, or even the year after.

And you are right as well that a suburban highway widening should get canned first in an ideal world - but if I'm not mistaken that comes out of provincial and federal coffers, not City. Apples and Oranges.

I read the article and I see that that we'd probably be in this situation without a recession because the City has decided to not run deficits. From what I read, in the past what they'd do is just go ahead with it this year, and jack up taxes next year to pay for it.

Honestly, I prefer the idea of living within our means. Not to the nth degree as a matter of ideology - certainly there are some exceptions to that. JMG mentioned above running a city like a business. I prefer to think that a city should be run like a household.

Those households which live within their means are typically healthier all-round. We're going to see that now in the recession - people who were seriously over-extended with huge debt are going to be slammed hardest. In fact a large part of the cause of this recession is both the US nationally and its residents individually having seriously overextended themselves.

However, even in a well-run household, there are certain things you just do no matter what. Like you have to have food, and a roof over your head. You may have to stop going to the movies, theatre, restaurants. You may have to cut back on luxury foods and move back to more raw staples. That sort of thing. But you still have to have food, and a roof. City infrastructure certainly falls into the category of food and roof over your head, I won't argue that. But how bad is it? When does it need to be replaced?

Back to the household example, I made a call on the roof of my own house this spring. I thought we'd get away with one more year, and as it turns out I was very wrong and we're now scrambling to get it done and may be very, very lucky to make it through the winter without leaks. But roofs are very expensive and we can't afford it either way. It was a very tight call. Nonetheless, had I actually gotten up on the ladder in the spring like I did 2 weeks ago, we'd have bitten the bullet and had the roof done over the summer, and made major cut-backs everywhere else to pay for it. I have to assume the city engineers are the ones gettng up on the ladders. They will truly know whether or not the project can wait a year or two. Certainly not the mayor.

And even though this seems that it would have been the case even without the recession, the fact is we are entering the worst recession^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H depression we've seen in probably 150 years. This one is shaping up to be far bigger than the one in the 1930s, and more like the one in the late 1800s which not so many people have heard of. To fail to see this is to be completely blind. This is probably why the mayor is singing a different tune than he was 6 months ago - an awful lot has happened in 6 months. Sure, tinfoil hatters like me have seen this coming for 2 or 3 years and have been preparing for it, but most people have had their blinders on and have been ignoring the signs, so they've only really seen it coming for a few months now.

I think the answer to this situation is precisely this : what do the city engineers say? If they say this can wait a year or two no problem, then that's the prudent thing to do. If they say it cannot wait, then it should not.

[Edited By amckay Oct 29, 2008 08:15 PM]

How To Run A Household

Without watching that video, can you explain what it has to do with anything I've said? If you want to debate the matter, debate it. Don't just flippantly refer to some video and leave the rest up to our imaginations. Point by point, please address what I said above. Directly. If you don't do that, then I have to assume you can't. I have to assume that I've won the debate.

[Edited By amckay Oct 30, 2008 01:39 PM]

p.s. to be more explicit, your reference to the video seem to me to be a straw man argument, and a very poor one at that. I mention "household", so you give a reference to some warped video from the 1950's on what was considered back then to be a "household". That's a complete and total (and intentional) misrepresentation of what I wrote. It has nothing to do with anything I was talking about. Right here in the 21st century, we still use the term "household", and it does not refer to what was considered such in the 1950s. It refers to what is considered such today.

So if you want to debate my comparison of the City to a household, please don't insult me with this nonsense. Stand up (or sit down) and debate what I was talking about - a household in 2008. Don't try to spin what I wrote into something completely unrelated.

The family in this outdated movie from 1949 must learn that a proper management of schedules, responsibilities, privileges and finances leads to a happier home. Isn’t that still relevant today and what basically amckay is saying to us?

I called Leadman to give my support to the reconstruction. I was told by a staffer that the reconstruction project wasn’t in the budget for 2009. Leadman believes that the infrastructure must be rebuilt and she is fighting to have it included.

I believe too that what’s happening now is because of “O’Brien’s idiotic approach to city budgeting” and he is using the current global crisis for political opportunism. Six months ago this mayor stood before cameras in Hintonburg telling Ottawa how critical the state of the roads and the sewers was and how vital reconstruction was.

Why do people believe the simple notion that you must run a city like a business or a household to be efficient, when a city by its very nature, how it operates, how it exists, isn’t like a business or a household. Building new roads or providing social housing isn’t like manufacturing widgets or doing the family budget.

[Edited By JMG Oct 31, 2008 10:23 AM]

So JMG, I guess I do agree with the video based on your summary of it (still have not watched it). But you still are leaving a lot to the imagination because you have yet to utter a word about what is wrong with what I've said. Are you saying that management of schedules, responsibilities, privileges and finances is not important? For a household? For a city? Both? Neither?

Can someone please explain "O'Brien's idiotic approach to city budgeting"? From what I see so far, what you are calling "idiot" is the notion that we should live within our means and not run deficits. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I've already conceded that a no-deficit-no-matter-what ideology is not sound. But in general no deficits is a good idea and a good thing to strive for. But again, not at all costs. Cities can and do go bankrupt. So do states, provinces and entire countries (Iceland is pretty close right now in the current crises). It's not pretty when it happens. It comes right back to : what do the city engineers have to say about this project? Can it wait til we have money for it? Or not? If not, I'll be glad to add my voice of support here.

I'll also concede that there seems to have been some serious budgeting flaps made. Like spending the provincial infrastructure money on other items. I too was initially upset with that. But what was the alternative? Deficit? Raise taxes next year? Or do any of you have another alternative? Best I can see there are 3 choices : (1) don't do the work, (2) raise taxes, (3) run a deficit. So which of those are others in this thread suggesting is a better idea? Or are there options 4 and 5 which I don't see right now?

I guess one could argue that this was a circumstance where the "not at all costs" clause should come in. But I'll go right back to "what are the city engineers saying"?

I'll also point out that I am the only person so far in this thread using anything but fallacies as arguments. I've already pointed out a straw man, which OK I admit was not completely one afterall (though associating my comments with 1949 was IMO still a fallacy because it was implying that my thoughts were "backwards"). The rest of what I see in this thread is purely appeal to emotion, which is every bit as invalid as a straw man.

The closest someone else came to a real argument were the figures JMG gave us on monies the City was supposed to have for infrastructure. While this is very useful information, the manner in which it was presented was also appeal to emotion because what's needed to really give any meaning whatsoever to those numbers are more numbers on what's been spent so far this year on infrastructure. It's all well-and-good to say that we have X dollars for infrastructure, but if we've already spent X then it's really a moot point because we are clearly out of money.

Dude, maybe we just don't feel like arguing.

and I was the one who said idiotic. JMG was quoting my original post (you know, the one you barely read and then go on to create arguments anyway?)

Idiotic like campaigning on promise to freeze taxes when any analysis of the city's financial position in the last 10 years shows that this is irresponsible

idiotic like spending thousands on consultants for reports that don't tell you much different from what staff has been saying all along

idiotic like spending the contingency fund and using money for long-term projects on short-term crises

idiotic like spending money on an arbitration for firefighters when anyone who knows anything about public sector collective bargaining would tell you that you're just going to end up having to shell out the same increases everyone else in the province gets

idiotic like declaring it will be easy to cut 500 jobs in the city with no examples of what jobs can be cut and what the implications on city services are

idiotic like building into the city budget an assumption that the province is going to upload certain services, when there is no firm commitment from the province to do so

idiotic like cancelling the light rail contract and exposing the city to a multi-million dollar lawsuit, and then passing a transit plan that looks remarkably like the old one but will take longer and cost more money to build

need I go on? It doesn't take a PhD in economics to show that Larry O'Brien's performance as mayor is laughable and that anything he says about the city's financial position and the solutions thereto is without credibility. We have known for years that we have a revenue problem in this city. A revenue problem, not a spending problem. And although our local economy is relatively stable, thanks to government employment, the province's economy certainly isn't - this is going to make it harder for the province to upload services and relieve some of the financial pressure on cities.

Want evidence of the problems created by deferring maintenance of public infrastructure? Look no further than Ottawa Community Housing. Now we may lose what little affordable public housing we have because the city did not invest in maintaining the quality of the stock. Deferring the maintenance of our sewer and water infrastructure is only going to lead to further problems like the Petrie Island Sewage scandal.

I don't think it's fair to say I barely read your original post - there was barely anything to read. Believe it or not I'm not just here to argue - my questions and comments above were clearly geared towards trying to eke a bit more information out of this topic, because even still there is not much of it to be found.

I agree with most of your definitions of "idiotic" (and BTW, I did catch the fact that JMG was just quoting you), but not with all of them. But I won't get into that. Thanks just the same for adding some substance.

Believe it or not I'm as disappointed as the next person that this seems to be getting shelved. And I would like to advocate for it getting picked up again as soon as possible, but not without knowing more facts. You've provided a bit more information, but not enough for me to add my voice. I can still see there is a lot more to this story.

Most importantly - infrastructure work like this most definitely can be delayed a year or two as long as the engineers say it can. But nobody is asking the engineers I guess because nobody is interested in the truth here. Which seems to indicate maybe it's just another exercise in fist-shaking at the evil Mayor Larry. The problem with community housing is that it got delayed year after year after year (after decade) even though everyone was saying it could wait no longer and was in a serious state of decay. That's not a good example at all to support your argument. We're right back to me sounding like a broken record : what are the engineers saying about this project? If they say it cannot wait a year or two, then I'll start writing letters and encouraging friends to do the same.

Well, I don't need the engineers to reinforce my commitment to the project.

Incidentally, I did write the fellow who heads up the project to ask what is going on. Basically they are just waiting for the budget to come down. It's clearly a political decision driving public works budgeting next year. Which means, in my mind anyway, that we have to approach the issue politically. That means pressure on councillors about how important this reconstruction is to our community.

[Edited By Miss Vicky Nov 01, 2008 12:18 PM]

We've sent our emails to Christine and, for what it's worth, Mayor O'Brien's office. If there's anything more organized than that, I would be much, much obliged if you'd point us in the right direction Vicky.

Keep up the great blogging....

There will be more to do when the budget is released next week. Stay tuned!