Jump to content

      













Photo

Municipality of Saanich - Mayor and Council General Discussion Thread


  • Please log in to reply
1128 replies to this topic

#41 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 8,334 posts

Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:15 PM

I don't see anything nefarious necessarily. If Gail Stephens were still around there'd be no way Helps would work with her. 


"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#42 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:46 PM

I don't see anything nefarious necessarily. If Gail Stephens were still around there'd be no way Helps would work with her. 

 

Either do I.  Change happens at the top, it's how it works with thse type of executives, that's why they get good salaries and have decent severance packages already lined up.  If you took over at the top of a corporation with a $200M/yr. budget, you would not want your top person to be a guy that does not share your vision, even if he was competent at the job before.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#43 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 8,330 posts

Posted 13 December 2014 - 10:05 PM

Thing is, Mayors are not CEOs of corporations and Atwell isn't allowed to appoint whoever he wants as CAO.
  • Nparker and Mixed365 like this

#44 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 9,965 posts

Posted 14 December 2014 - 10:04 AM

The problem is that it sounds like he jumped the gun - the CAO is an appointment of council and not of the mayor.   Even if he wanted him gone, he should have first gone to council and discussed it with them.

You may not be entirely correct on this one Bernard. This from the Community Charter.

 

http://www.bclaws.ca....xml#section116

 

Suspension of officers and employees

151  (1) The mayor must suspend a municipal officer or employee if the mayor considers this necessary.

(2) A suspension under subsection (1) must be reported to the council at its next meeting, and the council may

(a) reinstate the officer or employee,

(b) confirm the suspension,

© confirm and extend the suspension, or

(d) dismiss the officer or employee.



#45 Mixed365

Mixed365
  • Member
  • 922 posts

Posted 14 December 2014 - 03:37 PM

Thing is, Mayors are not CEOs of corporations and Atwell isn't allowed to appoint whoever he wants as CAO.

I agree jonny. The comparisons that are made of a Mayor acting more like a CEO are incorrect. I have said it before and I will say it again, a Mayor governs, they do not manage - big difference. 


  • Nparker and jonny like this

“To understand cities, we have to deal outright with combinations or mixtures of uses, not separate uses, as the essential phenomena.”
- Jane Jacobs 


#46 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 14 December 2014 - 05:27 PM

I have said it before and I will say it again, a Mayor governs, they do not manage - big difference. 

 

And I'll say it again.  If I'm the elected Mayor, and my right-hand man/woman does not share my goals, he/she has got to go.  It will not work otherwise.


  • Rob Randall and tedward like this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#47 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 8,334 posts

Posted 14 December 2014 - 06:27 PM

It's pretty clear that if the mayor doesn't have the full confidence of the CAO/City Manager he will soon be out the door. The mayor has a vision for the city, the manager must share that vision. Whether or not you agree is meaningless. That's just the way it works. The only question unanswered is exactly how many councillors supported Paul Murray.

 

2000: Victoria City Manager Don Roughley resigns:

 

[City Councillor Bob] Friedland said Roughley -- whom he often said acted as if he were Victoria's mayor -- limited information to council and staff to achieve his own ends.

Many customer service representatives -- a department Roughley reorganized and developed -- were gleeful upon hearing the news Thursday. Michele Smith said "there really is a Santa Claus after all."

Whether they loved or hated him, many were surprised by the resignation -- although mounting speculation before the November civic elections suggested Roughley would either walk or be pushed out by a new mayor and council.

"He's worked to his agenda with the last council and I'm not so sure he would be able to do that with this one and I have no doubt that's a contributing factor to his decision to leave," said John Burrows, president of CUPE Local 50, representing the city's outside workers.

 

 

2006: Mayor Lowe fires Joe Martignago:
 

 

The mayor said the city wants to develop a new strategic plan and council felt a new city manager was needed to "help us move forward in that direction."

Martignago said he was never told what that new direction was.

 


Edited by Rob Randall, 14 December 2014 - 06:28 PM.

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#48 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 08:45 AM

Atwell will be on CFAX in the 9am hour.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#49 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:15 AM

Holy Cow!  Saanich staff produced this document, and it took Atwell, as Mayor, several attempts to get it.  Only after he reminded staff that he was entitiled to see it, did he get it.

 

http://richardatwell...nd_Promises.pdf


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#50 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 8,334 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:36 AM

^I don't understand the context. What was the purpose of that awkwardly-produced document? Guidance for staff for internal use only? Voting tips for Saanich staff in general?


"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#51 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:04 AM

^I don't understand the context. What was the purpose of that awkwardly-produced document? Guidance for staff for internal use only? Voting tips for Saanich staff in general?

 

Unknown still, apparently.  But it was given to a meeting of over 30 managers, there are minutes of that meeting.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#52 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 9,719 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:17 AM

^I don't understand the context. What was the purpose of that awkwardly-produced document? Guidance for staff for internal use only? Voting tips for Saanich staff in general?

 

I don't see the reason for the kerfuffle. Looks like a document that outlines the candidates public positions. I hope that Richard isn't trying to use this as justification for firing the CAO.



#53 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:20 AM

I don't see the reason for the kerfuffle. Looks like a document that outlines the candidates public positions. I hope that Richard isn't trying to use this as justification for firing the CAO.

 

You think staff ought to prepare a report that summarizes the candidates' positions, on subjects the staff choose?  It's not like it was the results of a candidate poll.

 

It's completely wrong.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#54 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 9,719 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:28 AM

You think staff ought to prepare a report that summarizes the candidates' positions, on subjects the staff choose?  It's not like it was the results of a candidate poll.

 

It's completely wrong.

 

If the document favoured a candidate, encourage people to vote a specific way or incorrectly stated positions it would be one thing but it looks to me like a general outline for the information of staff. Judging by the quality of the document it is not like someone spent hours on this.



#55 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 8,334 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:32 AM

I don't see the reason for the kerfuffle. Looks like a document that outlines the candidates public positions. I hope that Richard isn't trying to use this as justification for firing the CAO.

 

Except that it portrays Atwell as a meddling unknown and Frank as a benevolent savior. If the CAO was anywhere near this he must be fired. Senior managers are perfectly capable of doing their own research. I don't need my tax money spent on spoon feeding ridiculous propaganda like this.

 

If the document favoured a candidate, encourage people to vote a specific way or incorrectly stated positions it would be one thing but it looks to me like a general outline for the information of staff. Judging by the quality of the document it is not like someone spent hours on this.

 

 

Don't you get the fact that it's completely biased? Government has no business whatsoever going down this path. It's really shocking. Victoria went out on a limb this year and did something new: providing links to the candidate's websites. The idea that staff would summarize it--even if it weren't biased--is bad, even if it's a top secret briefing for select managers. You want to prod staff into staying with Leonard then get a table at the Monkey Tree Pub and do it own your own time.


Edited by Rob Randall, 15 December 2014 - 10:36 AM.

  • Jill likes this

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#56 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:36 AM

If the document favoured a candidate, encourage people to vote a specific way or incorrectly stated positions it would be one thing but it looks to me like a general outline for the information of staff. Judging by the quality of the document it is not like someone spent hours on this.

 

It's wrong.  Staff decided how to paraphrase candidates.  It also grouped them together on certain subjects.  And it was a waste of staff time.  It's wrong, wrong, wrong.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#57 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 9,719 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:40 AM

^ The positions were directly off of the candidate sites and comments from the all candidates meetings. Saying that Atwell is for open Government and reduced taxes is a negative?

 

If Atwell plan is to try and use this document as justification for firing the CAO then he has an uphill battle. The bigger issue is that he seems to be going down a path of confrontation with Saanich staff rather than collaboration. I can't see how he expects that he will get more done that way - unless he plans to fire everyone.



#58 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:45 AM

^ The positions were directly off of the candidate sites and comments from the all candidates meetings. Saying that Atwell is for open Government and reduced taxes is a negative?

 

Picking and choosing the candidates' comments, and positions is not right.  Nor is choosing the issues.  It's OK if you do it (make a comparison booklet or report), if the media does it, if anyone EXCEPT Saanich staff do it.


  • Rob Randall likes this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#59 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:47 AM

^ The positions were directly off of the candidate sites and comments from the all candidates meetings. Saying that Atwell is for open Government and reduced taxes is a negative?

 

Ya, that can be seen as a negative.  Because to solid left-wingers, "reduced taxes" can only mean staff lay-offs, lower wages, or service cuts.


  • Rob Randall likes this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#60 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 9,719 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 10:49 AM

Picking and choosing the candidates' comments, and positions is not right.  Nor is choosing the issues.  It's OK if you do it (make a comparison booklet or report), if the media does it, if anyone EXCEPT Saanich staff do it.

 

So what issue(s) do you think should be covered but were not?



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



6 user(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (1), VIResident, Cats4Hire

To advertise on VibrantVictoria, call us at 250-884-0589.