Forum
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 9     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next   »
warmodel

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 546
Reply with quote  #101 
The Skeptic:  One can imagine CROUSE'S  "shoe box" must have been overflowing with 'expense account receipts' and spilling all over - would you call this a sign of someone who hasn't got a clue in handling money.  I am in shock noting that at least he didn't have a 2nd box to handle the overflow. A 'normal' person would submit expense claims at the end of each month.  It's obvious CROUSE is far from being 'normal'.

Supporting him by those other three 'clowns' does not come as a surprise - it just shows that at what length they will go to support each other even if it defies the rules that should be in place. The sooner the election time comes the better,  and hopefully run them all from office. 
0
Swallow1

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 742
Reply with quote  #102 
My question is: what the heck is he doing with original(?) receipts in a shoebox?

Does the city accounting dept. photocopy expenses and give the originals back to the owner?

Or, does the city accounting dept. not follow GAAP?

Oh, and shouldn't RevCda have been notified of this "error" that gave El Kabong either MORE or LESS than he should have received?

And finally, will El Kabong be asking his accountant to review his expenses all the way back from the time he quit understanding the rules of expense reconciliation?
0
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #103 
You have to turn in the ORIGINAL receipt. But Crouse goes by his own rules. Crouse know how to handle money....especially his own. He is meticulous...and would never keep receipts in a shoe box for fear that he might lose a few pennies by losing one.
0
warmodel

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 546
Reply with quote  #104 
OMG:  As I recall going back in time, when the subject "double dipping" brought about some discussion, CROUSE I believe readily admiotted keeping his receipts at home in a shoe box.
0
Swallow1

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 742
Reply with quote  #105 
@warmodel RE: Original Shoebox Receipts

Would you agree that the accounting dept. wasn't doing their job(s)?  Or, could it be that there were/still are different rules for various members sitting on council?

Could it be that Is El Kabong is only the tip of the iceberg? What about the guy in the Man Cave?
0
Willy

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 225
Reply with quote  #106 
So isn't a judge supposed to render his decision on the petition to have Crouse removed from office today? Let's hope the petition is successful.
0
Head Honcho

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,169
Reply with quote  #107 
Note to readers:

I have made inquiries as to the current status of the mayor Crouse pecuniary interest case and have received a response.

I am currently working on the details and will present an update tomorrow morning on the main page of SAP.

Since the matter is before the courts, I want to be sure the response is an accurate assessment of the entire matter.

Thanks for your patience. - HH
0
Swallow1

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 742
Reply with quote  #108 
Question: will any political group want to tie themselves to El Kabong's saddle, if he's been charged with a criminal act?

0
Murray Lambert

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 287
Reply with quote  #109 
In response to Swallow1's query, while both the court challenge on pecuniary interest and the Municipal inspection could impose a penalty of removal from office, neither of those involve breaches of the Criminal Code. However, if a forensic audit were to reveal evidence of fraud, that is entirely a different matter.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #110 

In the Gazette’s anonymous editorial, they opine that MacKay’s motion to exclude pecuniary interest lawsuits from the City’s liability insurance was a “waste of time.”

Apparently they rely on the City Solicitor’s opinion that if Councillors had to pay their own legal fees in cases where they were sued for breach of the pecuniary interest provisions, the Councillors may not vote on certain matters in which they technically did not have a conflict of interest.  Apparently Klenke [the City Solicitor] is worried that if they had to pay their own legal fees they may be cautious…. they may exercise reasonable care …. to ensure they did not breach the pecuniary interest rules.  In other words, Klenke is worried that Councillors would have to exercise the same degree of reasonable care as every other Canadian citizen has to exercise to ensure they are not sued for negligence.  Maybe to the Gazette this double standard is acceptable, but for the rest of us the elimination of special privileges for Council and City Employees is time well spent.

Secondly, section 179 states that a City may reimburse any councillor who successfully defends against a pecuniary interest charge or the Court decides the breach is not sufficiently serious to justify declaring their seat vacant.  If councillors are to be reimbursed for their legal expenses in certain casesit would seem to logically follow that the Legislator intended Councillors to pay for their legal fees in the first instance.  Maybe in the Gazettes eyes a motion to insure that the City’s liability insurance complies with Provincial policy is a waste of time, but for many that would seem to be a legitimate expenditure of Council’s time,

Thirdly, liability insurance is customarily intended to cover errors and omissions.  When a councillor deliberately ignores advice from several other councillors to recuse himself from the motion on the floor and deliberately proceeds to chair the meeting and vote on the motion, it is difficult to consider this in law to be either an “error” or an “omission.”  Since every insurance claim gives rise to a possible increase in premiums, the Gazette may consider a discussion of this matter to be a waste of time but for the taxpayer it seems like an exercise in responsibility. The Gazette may consider revisiting such a policy is a waste of time, but the general public wonders why we should be insuring deliberate actions which can be avoided with a modicum of common sense.

Fourthly, Klenke seems to blithely ignore the fact that the sections of the MGA dealing with pecuniary interest cry out to the politician saying that if you MIGHT have a conflict of interest problem …. recuse yourself because it is absolutely vital that the public be confident that governance is occurring in a manner which is above board.  Klenke seems intent on enabling potential conflicts by putting councillors in a position where they can say … oh well …... if anyone complains about my conflict of interest …. its no problem because its covered by insurance paid for by the taxpayer.  The Gazette may consider it a waste of time to ensure that City policy does not enable conflict situation, but the general public probably do not consider honest governance a waste of time.

Finally, even if we accept Klenke’s rational for saying pecuniary interest cases should be covered by insurance, the question arises: what is the social cost incurred if a Councillor does not vote on a matter which technically they are not in a conflict situation?   The answer is that there would be very little social cost. The motion would proceed normally and it would be decided by the remaining Councillors.  Therefore, since there is no social cost to the very concern expressed by Klenke, it remains questionable as to its viability as a justification for arguing that City Insurance should cover councillors deliberate acts of malfeasance.

However, I am pleased to see the Gazette’s anonymous editorialists duly chastened councillors for attempting to ensure compliance with the MGA and attempting to avoid increased insurance premiums for the taxpayer.  They will now have more time to address the really crucial matters that are pending .. like allowing chickens in everyone’s backyards
0
Murray Lambert

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 287
Reply with quote  #111 
In response to theskeptic's parting shot it would truly be a shame if concerned citizens were to fowl such vitally important endeavours, don't you think? [frown]
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #112 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Lambert
In response to theskeptic's parting shot it would truly be a shame if concerned citizens were to fowl such vitally important endeavours, don't you think? [frown]


I personally think it would be a feather in their cap... but then Cathy's whole plan is sort a chicken 'n egg situation.
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #113 
Interesting that theskeptic has concerns with an "anonymous" editorial from the Gazette, when every one of his posts here are anonymous.
__________________
 
0
Murray Lambert

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 287
Reply with quote  #114 
The fact of the matter regarding op-eds and the like is that editorial columns are seldom if ever published under the name(s) of those who authored it. The articles are the product of an editorial board which leads one, fairly or not, to surmise that the opinions expressed are those of the entire corporation.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #115 
Kevin:  Actually,  I have no "concern" with the Gazette editor being anonymous. I merely described the article as anonymous because there was no named author  to whom it could be attributed.    However, you or Dennis, who are constantly harping about anonymity, are free to take your crusade up with the Gazette if you so choose.   (Their defence may be a little tougher to make than that of the general public since the Sun and other newspapers habitually publish the name of the journalist who wrote the editorial.)  I think it would be an interesting "letter to the editor" which, as you say, I cannot write because I have no objection to non-defamatory letters being published anonymously but you or Dennis certainly have the credentials for that crusade.
0
Kevin

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 274
Reply with quote  #116 
Skeptic for someone who isn't concerned, interesting how you open and close your commentary pointing it out they are anonymous.

__________________
 
0
Willy

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 225
Reply with quote  #117 
The Editors name may not be published with the editorial written. Whether the "actual" editor wrote it or not is a moot point. By the fact that the editor permised the article and placed as an editorial then ultimately he (the editor) is responsible for the content of said article and it's being published. So it doesn't matter if it was written by a ghost writer or someone on the behalf of an editorial board or the editor himself. It all falls on the editors shoulders and his name is usually published with in the first few pages of each edition. So the editor really is not all that anonymous.
As I've posted before, I don't understand why people get their knickers in a knot when someone is anonymous anyway. Does it some how negate the comment? If comments are valid - then they stand on their own merit regardless of who said it. If the comments are incorrect or malicious people will recognize them for what they are and as always there are numerous options of recourse.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #118 

Willy:     You said "As I've posted before, I don't understand why people get their knickers in a knot when someone is anonymous anyway.

I have echoed the same sentiment many times over on this site. However, the answer to you question .... it seems to be that they get their knickers in a knot over anonymous posts because they disagree with the substance of the post but are unable or unwilling to provide a substantive rebuttal. Hence their next move is to attempt to create a distraction from the actual subject by frothing at the mouth about anonymous posters.

That tactic is evident here as you will notice there is no substantive rebuttal to my critique of Klenke's legal opinion.

0
danapop

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 268
Reply with quote  #119 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy
As I've posted before, I don't understand why people get their knickers in a knot when someone is anonymous anyway. Does it some how negate the comment? If comments are valid - then they stand on their own merit regardless of who said it. If the comments are incorrect or malicious people will recognize them for what they are and as always there are numerous options of recourse.


Politics in particular is not always based on hard indisputable fact but rather ones personal ideals and feelings.  Case and point is the funding of the library branch.  Fact is our library is over capacity.  Fact is It was designed for capacity of 50,000 residents.  Fact is majority of programs are over subscribed.  Yet many people 'feel' the library is not needed because the dont use it and or dont feel the timing is right.  

Posting anonymously generally infers there is something to hide.  An agenda.  A bias. Preconceived notions that the author does not want disclosed.  I dont like it which is why all my social media accounts are in my own name and I post under my own name.  These are my opinions, my comments and I own them.  

I think we can look at 'TheSkeptics' comments on the editorial as an example.  Is he able to be objective in his opinion and analysis of Councillor MacKay?  If we pretend that we dont know who he really is, then we are forced to either take the analysis at face value or assume he has a bias he/she doesnt want to disclose.  If we all acknowledge that we do know who he is then obviously he cannot be completely impartial and unbiased with anything that is posted or concerning Councillor MacKay.  

This is not Russia nor do we live in a dictatorship.  We are 100% free to express our opinions and thoughts without fear of repercussions.  That is enshrined to us in the Constitution.  There is no need to post anonymously.  In fact, it creates a liability for Don - which is exactly why the CBC as moved away from allowing anonymous posting.  

0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #120 

Willy: As I previously said "it seems to be that they get their knickers in a knot over anonymous posts because they disagree with the substance of the post but are unable or unwilling to provide a substantive rebuttal. Hence their next move is to attempt to create a distraction from the actual subject by frothing at the mouth about anonymous posters." That tactic is evident here as you will notice there is no substantive rebuttal to my critique of Klenke's legal opinion."

Dana's post provides a classic example of this distraction in action... note ... no substantive response to my original post.

I always find it amusing that it is the government employees with a guaranteed income, a guaranteed pension, and no clientel to worry about alienating who whine and cry about anonymous posts. ... but then I'm waiting for their substantive rebuttal to my original post in the vain hope they can contribute something of interest to the conversation.
I find it equally amusing that they continue to employ the illogical argument that the way to determine the validity of the argument is by identifying the author. Surely someone who holds themselves out to be educated would recognize that you look within the four corners of the post or editorial to determine whether or not it is unduly biased

Finally, his suggestion that an anonymous post somehow creates a legal liability ranges somewhere between preposterous and absurd.

0
Murray Lambert

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 287
Reply with quote  #121 
As the old saying suggests, perhaps we all should first pay greater attention to and carefully weigh out the message before taking aim at the messenger.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #122 
Returning to the actual discussion, one interesting aspect of the Gazette's "waste of time" article is that it discloses their inherent biases. 

After all, we had a situation in the past where Councillor Hughes moved a very simple motion namely that an independent auditor be hired to audit Crouse's expense claims. With Crouse conducting the band .... they wasted endless amounts of time splitting and amending the motion. Eventually  the motion evolved into a decision to have an in house "audit" of all councillors expenses.

The Administration then "wasted" literally hundreds of hours preparing a 30 page financial report which they admitted wasn't really an audit because they were not qualified auditors.

For some strange reason the Gazette never characterized this Crouse inspired project as a waste of time but an in camera discussion which probably took less than a half hour deserves a major editorial.

0
OMG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 767
Reply with quote  #123 
Maybe we should have insurance for those who commit robbery.But then that would not be a deterrent. If a politician did not have insurance coverage, maybe he/she would think twice about their actions. Do you think Crouse or Draper would use their own money to sue someone?  I agree with Councillor MacKay. It was not a waste of time. But then we have to deal with the biased Gazette who have become less Canadian and more American ...CNN...in their operation. The Gazette used to be a respected publication. They boast that they are fair and not biased...NOT TRUE. Now it appears that they refuse to print comments and letters from certain people.
0
danapop

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 268
Reply with quote  #124 
If you think I have guaranteed anything you are sadly mistaken.
0
Dennis Arneson

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #125 
Skeptic: Not sure why you wish to rehash the anonymity discussion, this but apprarently it has touched a nerve it has an element of importance, insecutity or whatever for you. Dana makes some very valid points. My stance and yours differ and likely alway will... I've accepted that. Do as you wish.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.