Tbnewswatch Local News
Saturday July 4 2015
10:41 PM EDT
2014-02-12 at 01:43

All done

None of Coun. Rebecca Johnson
Jamie Smith, tbnewswatch.com
None of Coun. Rebecca Johnson's $1 million in cuts were approved.
By Jamie Smith, tbnewswatch.com

A long and sometimes frustrating process for city council brought an approved budget and the proposed tax levy increase this year down to 3.02 per cent Tuesday night.

That number was at 3.45 per cent when deliberations began a week ago. After three meetings totaling nearly 20 hours councillors removed around $695,000 from the proposed $5.5 million increase, a majority of that coming from the end of budget meetings Tuesday night.

Coun. Linda Rydhom said it was a struggle to get to that number, which isn't close to the 2.76 per cent council wanted. It's unclear what the increased levy will mean for individual property owners as those numbers are done through assessment. Rydholm said an increased levy made for a surprising tax bill last year to people who had their property assessment go up.

"Many of us who were in that condition are now wondering what's going to happen this year," she said.

Mayor Keith Hobbs said he's happy where the budget ended up, stressing that when growth in the city is factored in the levy is actually around 1.69 per cent. But the process was difficult this year compared to budgets past.

"It was frustrating. I think there was some posturing, it's an election year for sure. That's always going to happen in an election year," he said.

Budget chair Coun. Mark Bentz said while this year's budget is responsible, the frustration is partly because the cost of everything keeps rising. This council has done a good job of trimming where needed while addressing badly needed infrastructure needs, more than $2.5 million of the levy will head to the enhanced infrastructure renewal fund, now at more than $7 million, in order to fix roads, bridges and storm sewers. But the balance is getting harder to maintain.

"After awhile there's very few places to find those easy cuts and we are there," Bentz said. "This council wasn't interested in cutting a lot from this budget." 

No one around the table knows that better than Coun. Rebecca Johnson.

Throughout the process she recommended more than $1 million in cuts, most of which would have come out of the Community and Emergency Services and Thunder Bay Police Service budgets. She asked police chief J.P. Levesque, Thunder Bay Fire Rescue chief John Hay and Superior North EMS chief Norm Gale if they could find $200,000 worth of cuts in each of thir budgets.

Coun. Iain Angus called the idea arbitrary, especially when Gale told council that removing that money would really be more like a $425,000 cut when matched funding from the province and towns in the region were factored in.

"It is foolish quite frankly to tinker with such a vital service to the city and the district,” he said.

She proposed cutting the $105,000 Meals on Wheels program, which also didn't see support. Hobbs said it's not something that he wants to see in the hands of another organization that could cut it out of the city altogether.

"It would be rude if we did this," he said.

Not one of the amendments were passed, some not even seconded. Around six hours into the meeting Tuesday, Johnson gave up.

"I really tried," she said. "I'm tired."

Eventually council did cut $500,000 from the budget for this year, usually put into its Post Employment Reserve Contribution. Another $150,000 will be found by removing three full-time equivalent jobs, either from the proposed 20 new ones this year or through attrition. Those cuts are on top of an $80,000 study removed last week.

The one addition in the budget was $35,000 for Shelter House's SOS pilot project, which helps the city's homeless during the winter. Since its inception this year, around 304 calls have been made, getting people out of the cold and into places like Shelter House or the Salvation Army.    

“They're in real danger. They could die and this program is saving lives,” Coun. Andrew Foulds, who introduced the funding proposal said.

The program has also been used by hospital staff, freeing up space for people who actually need emergency services. Hobbs said when he was a police officer he wished there was a program like SOS to call. The $35,000 could save hundreds of thousands of dollars by not having people in hospital beds or jail cells who don't need to be there.

A public post-budget consultation meeting will be held Wednesday at city hall starting at 6:30 p.m.

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.

Click here to report a typo or error



We've improved our comment system.
Eastender says:
I'd buy a ticket, but whats the use, I cant afford the taxes.
2/14/2014 1:24:18 PM
whodo says:
2/13/2014 6:55:46 PM
whodo says:

2/13/2014 6:38:37 PM
yqtyqt says:
Yep, more city employees. Just what we don't need. I guess the empire builders are doing their thing.

Family trees yes, but look at TBtel, Hydro and the Boards and Agencies as well. Add School Boards to the list. It will be difficult to do as the in-laws and cousins have different surnames.

Amongst the hiring policies, is one that deals with hiring family members. But, to my knowledge, there has never been a public report on this subject. Perhaps its time.
2/14/2014 9:24:38 AM
mystified says:
All caps is considered yelling in the cyber world.
2/17/2014 10:04:05 AM
The Badger Mountain Hermit says:
Why does the City have a department to lure doctors when its NOT in the hospital business...Why does the City have a mining consultant when its NOT in the mining business...any reason to keep this expensive Demmings guy on staff...like...whats he done anyways...
2/13/2014 5:40:37 PM
Leith Dunick says:
Uh, he retired some time ago.
2/13/2014 9:14:59 PM
north shore says:
i dont understand why EMS is always under the microscope, half their funding is matched by the province. while police and fire are 100 per cent funded by the city.
2/13/2014 2:10:24 PM
mystified says:
I can't wait for a new council to be elected. All the comments will be compliments and showing support and pride in the city.

I don't know what all you miserable forms of life are going to do after the election and everything gets fixed.
2/13/2014 8:57:10 AM
Kam River says:
At the rate this council spend money. With in 10 year a modest 2 bedroom 50 year old home will be paying close to $15,000 per year.
People will be shopping on the FWFN because the business taxes will be so high that most of the jobs and non gov services will have move else were.
(1) This coucil is budgeting a million dollars to look at moving the TBAG to the Marina. They presently pay a $1.00 per year to the college
(2) $300, 000 for the first year operating costs for a youth centre
(3) And we have no idea what the Multiplex will cost as they push this ahead.

And don't forget your property values went up so you tax will go up on top of what council passed along.

If you are in your late 40's or 50's today you will not beable to stay in your home upon retirements.

The mayor and council look at the citizens are a money tree.

Hobbs and Aldo lead the way as the big spenders, while Bentz, Rebecca and Larry tried their best to rain in the big spenders.
2/12/2014 7:29:32 PM
glass half full says:
Can someone help me out with the math on the 3.07%?

Is this interest compounded each year?

If it is compounded annually and there are no further increases for the next four years, will this 3.07% turn into a 13% overall increase by the year 2018?

Do workers see increases in their pay of this amount?

budget the books with the revenue that you know you have. Stop over spending, stop sending council members to China ( ALDO ).

Stop raising our taxes just because you can

We can not afford this. Council please stop. and rethink your action and your spending.

What kind of raise in in the budget for council this year?

2/12/2014 5:29:02 PM
Blah blah says:
Emergency service and police services and meals on wheels, that's where she wants to find savings. Nice. Any one councillor could have made ridiculous cut suggestions to make themselves look good.
2/12/2014 4:47:41 PM
Littlethunder99 says:
City needs to Curb spending, this means hard decesions and cutbacks to all budgets and spending. How about Freeze in wages, reduced benefits, headcount reductions, time to run the City like a real business. You just can't keep raising taxes, and making bad choices for Political reasons. Not one of these clowns would last in the real business world. There is no public accountability for spending taxpayers money
2/12/2014 3:48:25 PM
yqtyqt says:
I totally agree. Saving money by nickel and diming won't amount to much when you consider that 55% or more of our tax dollars pay is paid to employees. The big budget item is wages, benefits, and pensions. Most credible studies (not conducted by public sector unions themselves) peg public sector salaries & benefits/pensions anywhere from 15-30 % above comparable private sector employees. Even though the private sector employees pay for the civil service.

The real problem here is that politicians have fallen prey to the large public sector unions and their voting power. All you have to do is look at the Provincial and school board unions to see the power and influence they have.
2/13/2014 10:30:17 AM
fastball says:
That's right....do what every shortsighted, no-real-plan, fix-it-quick politician has done - and take the easy way out by cutting payroll.
Payroll's not the problem - you still need people to do the work. And if there aren't enough people, the work doesn't get done on time...or at all. And then when you finally realize that the work's not getting done - you have to hire them back. Please refer to Mike Harris' experiences in laying off RNA's and other personnel in the health care field.
Are we bleeding money because we try to do to many things? For too many people? Is urban sprawl finally getting to us? Can we do things better?
Any idiot can cut-cut-cut - but really, are you really "fixing" anything?
2/13/2014 3:23:57 PM
yqtyqt says:
If I understand your statement "do what every shortsighted, no-real-plan, fix-it-quick politician has done - and take the easy way out by cutting payroll" , any politician who wants to look for efficiencies within the govt structure is shortsighted. I guess what you're implying is that the city is a lean, mean, efficient machine. They have entitled workers & there is an appropriate number of guys to get the job done.

Well how many times have you driven by a city worksite and witnessed waste. 5 guys to patch potholes (3 leaning on their shovels while 2 actually do some work). Not noticeable is the truck driver, the supervisor, the manager, the general manager, the guys who booked off sick that day, etc, etc. If it happened in the private sector, most of the waste would be eliminated if they wanted to stay competitive.

You need to take the blinders off & look around you for waste before you speak

Complacency generates more complacency. Maybe we need more outsourcing to fix the problem
2/14/2014 8:55:14 AM
joey joe joe jr. shabadoo says:
I really hope Rebecca's down to earth thinking rubs off on the rest of them one day.

2/12/2014 12:10:17 PM
The Badger Mountain Hermit says:
Unionized stagehands at the Auditorium are only guaranteed 3 hours pay minimum on any call...why do Police get a 6 hour minimum to appear in court? Money could be saved right there, if there was any equality in this town.
2/12/2014 11:33:35 AM
jimmyboy says:
The province of Ontario is broke. Tbaytel is hurting financially. The City of Thunder Bay depends on a lot on provincial grant cash and the annual Tbaytel $17 million dividend to keep the tax increases low. The City of Thunder Bay spends a lot more money than it gets from municipal taxes. A lot more.

A round of salary increases for everyone!
2/12/2014 11:13:31 AM
Kidknapp says:
Trim the fat. There are cuts to be made in EMS, Fire, and Police services. Also, city services need to be looked at and how they can be trimmed. Our city is not growing and in todays economy, people cannot afford these increases.
2/12/2014 10:14:22 AM
rocketship says:
Before the last election everyone was howling for change, but other than the mayor, the majority of the councillors are same-o...same-o.
We can't keep doing the same thing, and expecting different results...imho.
2/12/2014 10:12:49 AM
Tbay99 says:
Mr.Angus, Mr.Foulds, and Mr.Pugh showed last night their complete disregard for taxpayers money. Please remember this come Election Day it's time to get these embarrassments off council!
2/12/2014 10:04:05 AM
fastball says:
OK...but show me the realistic options to replace them.
Sure, you can get rid of the "embarrassments" - but are you telling me that the next Joe Blow is going to be any better?
I'm not sure that "he's gotta be better than the other guy" is enough of a glowing endorsement to get me to vote for him.
2/12/2014 11:52:01 AM
yqtyqt says:
"I'm not sure that "he's gotta be better than the other guy" is enough of a glowing endorsement to get me to vote for him."

Where exactly did Tbay99 say that? Until nominations close, it's pretty difficult to size anything up, or make any informed decisions. I think he simply made the opinion about the disregard for taxpayers money.
2/12/2014 12:25:20 PM
S Duncan says:
We need Joe Blows to represent us because we are Joe Blows ourselves.

Hobbs pretended to be just that Joe Blow who was going to stop this glamourous life councillors were living. We thought he would stand up with authority and tell council to get ahold of themselves and stop wasting money.

What happened was Commisso got ahold of his puppet strings and Hobbs became a rubber stamp for all the spending he could dream up.

He volunteered to pay half of CNs engineering study for the bridge. Does that sound like a Joe Blow move to you? It seems like vote buying and special attention to me.

Want to vote for me knckleball? I'll be sure to shut down every bit of waste I possibly could.
2/12/2014 12:30:29 PM
BlueJay12 says:
S Duncan for Mayor!!
2/12/2014 9:27:18 AM
Baor says:
Oops....I just threw up a little bit.
2/12/2014 9:53:26 PM
S Duncan says:
I could promise you my "controversial remarks" would be a whole lot more newsworthy than some others.
2/13/2014 9:49:28 AM
yqtyqt says:
"How 'bout we sell those two rusted hockey stick beacons at the Marina? "

Who in their right mind would buy two rusted sticks for $900,000. Other than foolish politicians at all three levels. What a total waste.

In a few years, we'll have to pay for upkeep or pay someone to remove them.

This is ALL about spending. Right now the spendaholics are in charge. I'm hoping that by next year we have some fresh political blood who truly have the taxpayers in mind when the budget is discussed.

New political blood will make sure that we have new administrative blood in replace. We certainly need a change.
2/12/2014 9:14:15 AM
fastball says:
I remember these exact words being uttered before the last municipal election. The electorate voted out Peterson and installed Hobbs because she was the "crazy spender" and he was the "responsible guy" who would set the ship back on course, so to speak.
Well, either the realities of running of a city is actually...you know, kind of HARD - or certain segments of the electorate have a really serious disconnect between their wishes and the reality.
2/12/2014 11:13:51 AM
yqtyqt says:
"the realities of running of a city is actually...you know, kind of HARD".

Yes no doubt it's hard. Lots of things in life are HARD as you put it. Working all night at a convenience store that is robbed regularly is hard, but people do it. Working tirelessly to get an education is hard, working at fast food restaurants is hard, etc. Surely you get the picture.

We have some of the highest paid employees in town working for the city. I would expect that they are working HARD instead of spending it commenting to articles on tbnewswatch. Didn't you say you worked for the City?

Its true that Peterson was voted out in favour of Hobbs. He's got one vote on issues just like the rest of council. There's a lot on council who are long term, career politicians who get re-elected on name recognition. Change doesn't occur overnight, but I'm still optimistic.
2/12/2014 12:11:38 PM
fastball says:
Absolutely it's hard....and doubly hard when people who really haven't got a sense of the big picture are second-guessing and criticizing your every decision and vote. We all want the city to be lean and mean - but there are certain realities to consider for every politician...namely what do you cut and what's the fallout. Because no matter what you do - you're gonna piss someone off.
2/12/2014 1:16:24 PM
yqtyqt says:
"no matter what you do - you're gonna piss someone off".

Right now, we've got lots of taxpayers "pissed off" as you put it. They're the ones who are paying the freight.

As I've continuously stated, the easiest and right thing to do is to deal with the most expensive item in the budget. Municipal wages, benefits and pensions. Institute a graduated wage & benefit freeze. Allow very modest increases at the lower levels, freeze at the mid levels and roll back at the higher levels. The senior managers won't starve if we roll back wages 5-10%. The mid levels won't show up at the foodbanks.

Mandate a hiring freeze when positions become vacant. Reducing the obscenely high number of employees by attrition won't hurt anyone. It may require some reshuffling of resources and responsibilities. The city is NOT an employment agency.

I don't care if we're stepping on anyone's toes (or pissing off as you put it). We need serious solutions to serious problems. And soon.

Not the same old, same old.
2/13/2014 10:02:26 AM
fastball says:
As I said before - it's shortsighted to cut the human element in an effort to "balance the budget". It's useless unless you decide to cut the services as well. Cutting the crews means you're now waiting an extra year to get that road resurfaced.
The thing is to look for our biggest waste (not EXPENSE..but WASTE) of money. Are we spreading ourselves too thin? Are we trying to provide services to everyone everywhere.
Let's take a look at the whole picture before deciding the cutting the guys on the crews is the most effective to slash costs.
2/13/2014 4:22:19 PM
yqtyqt says:
I believe that you're really having a difficult time understanding & following some the postings on this site. I also understand you to be a city employee who may have a vested interest in the discussion.

Look, it's a fact that govt employees have been shielded from the recent recession. They've continued to receive their regular increases, their awesome benefits, and their platinum pensions. All while the burden of the recession is absorbed by the non-gov't sector.

Its also a fact that we have a comparatively larger number of city employees, a fatter payroll burden, and we need to look for efficiencies. Do some research for yourself.

Nobody is hurt by reducing costs by attrition and I have continually stated that the fat cats at the top should shoulder most of the salary decreases. Surely, the $100,000+ employees wont be adversely affected or starve.

I've spent most of my adult life working for govt, I know that there's inefficiency there.

You need to stop this entitlement thing
2/14/2014 8:04:16 AM
fastball says:
Points of clarification here....
I am not directly employed by the city.
I'm barely at the Canadian average income level.
I get the equivalent pension as other municipal employees in Ontario - no more, no less. I've been paying into my pension fund for over 30 years, so don't tell me I'm "getting" anything. I've put in enough money into it.
My average increase in wages is about 1 to 1.5 percent. My taxes go up about 1.6 percent. Do the math - no one's buying Rolls Royces here.
My point is that cutting payroll is a cheap, easy way to cut costs. But it's shortsighted, as it means that work won't get done. So you end up paying overtime if you want stuff done on time. Or it turns into a sloppy rush job - you end up doing it over again. Either way, it's a wash, moneywise.
My point is look for the biggest annual moneyWASTERS - ie, providing a million dollars worth of services to an area where you're only getting 100K in tax revenue. YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR. That's your chronic wasters.
2/15/2014 10:46:59 AM
outsidelookingin says:
Don't you think that's a sad state when City employees are some of the highest paid employees in town? More part-time minimum wage jobs please ;) Where's the private business people with there big yearly raises, creating well paying jobs? No where to be seen, they are squeezing employees rights and benefits "to keep the business from going under"... while the owner's on a trip to Cuba.

Most City employee's make living wages that allow them and their families to live middle to low end-of-the-road lives, they are not the wealthy of this town.

If you think they should be paid less then all you are doing is creating more crappy paid jobs. Ah but they are paid with my TAX money is what you're thinking... you buy groceries, clothes, etc and that money goes to peoples wages too. People cry fowl about garment factory people and their wages and working conditions, I guess TAX payers won't be happy until the City is run in that way... cheap as possible. Outsource the Mgmnt to India???
2/13/2014 8:14:49 AM
yqtyqt says:
"Where's the private business people with there big yearly raises, creating well paying jobs?" Nothing stops you from becoming a private business owner. Do it, I challenge you. But good luck with high taxes, hydro rates, government regulations and red tape. As a business owner, you'll have a stream of charitable organizations and sporting groups banging on your door for help. If you're lucky, you'll get some personal time to get away for your hard work. Knowing full well when you get back your higher tax bill, excessive hydro bill, and employees are waiting for you. But that's okay with you, because there will be some idiot writing on this website about how little you do for the community.

Yep, I really think you should go into business for yourself to find out what its like.

But from reading your comments, you'd be better suited being a govt worker. Well fed and entitled.
2/14/2014 9:03:31 AM
Papercut says:
Well done...give yourselves a nice juicy pat on the back....

Just curious? Can you raise taxes every year? Is it possible? What do you think will eventually happen?

Doesn't matter....the light at the end of the tunnel is a speeding freight train...headed right at the middle income earner.
2/12/2014 9:10:07 AM
Reignmaker says:
These new and fresh ideas include the event centre (which will cost us more money than it makes for the foreseeable future) over priced art pieces that do not bring anyone here simply to look at them and a poorly thought out marina project.

I will gladly pay for the daycare spots because the private ones are often a crap shoot and usually provide no form of education while the child is there.

If you would rather pay to keep a hockey arena open or buy more art rather than keep services like ambulance and daycare funded, perhaps your priorities are not the ones the City needs to move forward with.
2/12/2014 8:59:03 AM
fairlane says:
Ok, part of budget deals with spending. We heard a lot about where they plan to trim an already lean budget.

What about the stuff they are spending money on? Are we still maintaining bike lanes? How 'bout we sell those two rusted hockey stick beacons at the Marina? There's $900,000 right there. Sell those and keep daycare. Kidding.

One of the advantages of living up here was that it was cheaper to live and taxes were lower. Not no more.
2/12/2014 8:42:31 AM
Eastender says:
Maybe if tbey were straight they might be worth something, now their just scrap iron. Lucky to get 10 cents on the dollar for them.
2/12/2014 6:01:31 PM
Ozone says:
No one wants to cut the pork barreling programs! Don't want to as Mr Angus says tinker. This council has some really dangerous spenders who could careless about the services the city is suppose to provide and would rather waste and tax the heck out of the highest taxed citizens in Ontario.
Angus, Virdaramio , Pugh, Foulds, Ruberto to all need to be replaced in the next election!
2/12/2014 7:19:56 AM
yqtyqt says:
I agree totally Ozone.

There is no fresh thinking about innovative ways of saving taxpayers money. It's the same old, same old from the group you mentioned. I want to add Boshcoff to your list of deadbeats.

Well, I say out with the old (or same old) and in with some new and fresh ideas. Seriously, Thunder Bay needs some new blood to replace these tired old men. It takes a lot out of them and they heed a permanent rest.
2/12/2014 8:31:12 AM
123franklin says:
Your job is not done until you save taxpayers money. You need ideas here is some. Remove Aldermen at large. Remove daycare services they're bleeding money. Any department asking for more money in their budgets. Sned them back until they save taxpayers money. Reduse urban sprawl it costs us infrastructural money to maintain. There is nothing wrong in living in three story houses. Get rid of money losing businesses and services such as golf courses.
If theses are not done as a well known taxpayer states. I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!!!!!!!

Thank You
2/12/2014 6:47:36 AM
S Duncan says:
you had me until you mentioned urban sprawl.

If people want live uncrowded that's their business. Its not the municipal government's job to socially engineer us (not that it doesn't stop them from trying).

Do more miles of roads and sewers cost more money? Yes they do, but we're not talking about the city actually keeping up with it. The city happily charges $6000 in taxes for homes out by mountain rd/ nor wester area and they don't even have sewers.

They have natural gas though and that was put in by private companys but yet the city cannot provide sewers?

I think the "urban sprawl" term is just an excuse to blame increasing budgets on.

The biggest waste of our tax dollars are welfare and welfare projects. All those programs do is take, and take more every year. They are ballooning rapidly and need to be brought in line.

As liberal as Rebecca is on many social issues, its a sad state of affairs when she appears as the lone conservative on council.

We're in big trouble.
2/12/2014 8:43:50 AM
Eastender says:
Yes, any one concerned about urban sprawl in tnis neck of the woods doesn't really know what their talking about. Urban sprawl is a non issue in ThunderBay, and is being used by some as a distraction from other more relevant issues in this burg.
2/14/2014 1:13:38 PM
fastball says:
No, I'm pretty sure her job is to keep the city running and moving forward....her job is NOT to save taxpayers' money.
I'm a little curious about the fact that not one of the other council members would second any one of her motions. SO that leaves us with only two options - either every single one of them is out of touch....or her proposals were so totally out of step that they didn't even warrant a debate. Hmmm....12 against one. I know which way I'd think.
Ms. Johnson knows there's an election coming - and maybe it's just possible that she's trying to curry favour with the "cut 'n' save" crowd.
2/12/2014 10:35:40 AM
cm punk says:
Johnson is the only city council member that realized the city and its financial position is not in a good state.
Let the rollercoaster begin.
2/12/2014 5:23:32 AM
yqtyqt says:
Thank you Rebecca. We all know you did your best to keep the tax rates to a reasonable increase.

The frustration must be overwhelming when any attempt to reduce the fiscal insanity is met with resistance. I certainly couldn't sit there and be silent when you watch the spend happy councillors support the continuous waste of good money being flushed down the toilet.

Pugh and Angus are awfully free with other peoples money. What a shameful performance.
2/12/2014 8:39:07 AM
canuckman55 says:
incorrect actually. The mayor also proposed more than 2 million in savings but those were also shut down by council.
2/12/2014 9:47:08 AM
Eastender says:
If Hobbs proposed any tax cuts and he was shut down by council, why did that not get reported here? Anyone? Leith?
2/12/2014 5:55:48 PM
Leith Dunick says:
I wasn't there, so I'm not sure. Might have been suggested outside of the council meeting and he was told they weren't feasible?
2/12/2014 6:44:00 PM
yqtyqt says:
Well if they're discussing budget items outside of the council meeting, I would question the legality of that practice under the Act and suggest the transparency isn't very important to our elected officials.
2/13/2014 10:06:35 AM
jimmyboy says:
HOBBS himself did not propose $2 million $$$ in reductions...your statement is nothing but a crock of B.S.
2/13/2014 6:52:28 PM
Eastender says:
I know this sounds cliche. But here is the basic problem with governments of any kind and money. There is no incentive to conserve the stuff and create a lean operation. There is every incentive to expand your department, and in turn expect to be paid more money for having to manage more people Now corporations, know how to motivate people to create a financially efficient operation. They give managers, and administrators bonuses for find ways to cut operating expenses. Imagine if you were given the incentive to cut operating costs, by a half million dollars, by getting a 5% bonus. Thats a cool $25,000 bonus. Taxpayers save money, some guy in admin. Gets to go to Vegas. Admin and councilors could all share in the bonuses, and taxes would come down. Negotiate for an industry to operate in the city, get a bonus. Find ways to reduce the cost for police, fire, garbage pickup.

And thats what makes corporations function effectively.
Could it work for a municipal govt.? Whynot
2/12/2014 6:32:09 PM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Log In