A Stand Alone Pool Wasn't A Stupid Plan

GRAVENHURST COUNCIL HAS TO BITE THE BULLET ON THIS ONE

A STAND-ALONE POOL WASN'T A STUPID PLAN

     I DON'T KNOW IF, ON OCCASION, AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, IN THIS MUNICIPALITY, GIVES ANY THOUGHT AT ALL, TO THE WEIGHT OF RESPONSIBILITY, FOR MANAGING A MULT-MILLION DOLLAR CORPORATION? HOW MANY OF THE COUNCILLORS WOULD THINK OF APPLYING FOR AN EXECUTIVE JOB WITH A MAJOR BANK OR INVESTMENT FIRM? OR A MAJOR EXECUTIVE ROLE IN INDUSTRY? WHILE IT MAY SEEM A LOT LESS SIGNIFICANT TO BE A COUNCILLOR IN A SMALL RURAL TOWN IN ONTARIO, THERE IS NO MINIMIZING THE CAPITAL REQUIRED TO RUN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. THERE IS NO MINIMIZING THE LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY EACH COUNCILLOR HAS, TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS, AT THE RIGHT TIME. THERE ARE A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS TO HOLD OFFICE, AND IN GOOD TIMES, THE WORRIES SEEM MOOT. FROM THE BEGINNING OF THIS COUNCIL TERM, NOTHING HAS BEEN MOOT. NOT A THING. IT MAY BE THE CASE SOME COUNCILLORS HAVE FELT THEY HAVE BEEN OVER THEIR HEAD, WITH SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE REC. CENTRE, AND THIS IS UNDERSTANDABLE. MORE THAN JUST A FEW COUNCILLORS, HONESTLY SPEAKING, DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERIENCE TO DEAL WITH THE KIND OF DISASTERS THAT BEGAN ERUPTING ALL OVER THE PLACE, WITHIN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE NEW ADMINISTRATION. BUT WHETHER THEY READ THE FINE PRINT OR NOT, THIS IS WHAT THE OFFICE REPRESENTS……AND WE ALL KNOW THERE'S MORE TO THIS GOVERNANCE THING THAN "RIBBON-CUTTING" GIGS, AND SMILING FOR THE CAMERA. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S NO RESCUE FROM THESE RESPONSIBILITIES, UNTIL THE END OF THE TERM, WHEN ANOTHER BUNCH OF EAGER BEAVERS WILL ENTER WHAT IS USUALLY A POPULARITY CONTEST. AT THIS POINT, THERE IS THE PROVERBIAL TEMPEST IN THE TEAPOT, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THEY KNOW THE TRUE FATHOM OF PUBLIC SENTIMENT. IT IS NOT GOOD. THIS IS NOT A WEALTH COMMUNITY. WE NEED OUR FOOD BANK. WE HAVE MANY FOLKS ON SOCIAL ASSISTANCE, AND MANY OTHERS ARE ON FIXED INCOMES. THERE ARE LOTS OF RESIDENTS WHO CAN'T AFFORD THEIR TAXES NOW, BECAUSE OF CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND THEIR CONTROL, AND YET MUST DEAL WITH THE MULTI-COLORED "TAX ARREAR" NOTICES SENT THROUGH THE POST. WHEN COUNCILLORS THINK THEY'VE GOT IT TOUGH, THEY SHOULD START LOOKING AT THE STATISTICS, OF THE TOWN THEY REPRESENT. THEY WOULD NOTICE WE HAVE FAMILIES IN CRISIS. WE HAVE KIDS COMING TO SCHOOL WITHOUT HAVING HAD BREAKFAST. WE HAVE A GOODLY AMOUNT OF HOPELESSNESS, AND DEPRESSION, AND IT'S EASY TO GET ANGRY, FAST, WHEN WE START LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL COSTS TO A REC. CENTRE ROOF…..THAT ARE "OH WELL, WE HAVE TO FINISH IT AFTER ALL." SOMEONE WHO IS BEHIND ON THE MORTGAGE, AND JUST CAME BACK FROM THE FOOD BANK, MAY NOT APPRECIATE THIS RECKLESS ATTITUDE ABOUT MONEY. THERE IS AN ARROGANCE ATTACHED TO THIS PROJECT I DON'T LIKE. I HAVE FOUND IT ALL ALONG. I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE TO FEEL THIS WAY. SO, AS PART OF THE JOB OF BEING OUR REPRESENTATIVE, WE HAVE TO BE HONEST. IT'S BECOMING A CRYSTAL PALACE IN EVERY SENSE, AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A SOCIAL / RECREATION HUB FOR THE COMMUNITY. COUNCIL CAN CHANGE THIS IF THEY HAVE THE WILL. IT'S UP TO THEM.

    I'M REASONABLY CONFIDENT, GRAVENHURST COUNCILLORS, ARE NEVER GOING TO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE KIND OF INTRUSIVE PRESS, NEWS SCRUMS, AND DAY TO DAY BATTLES WITH PESKY REPORTERS, CITY POLITICIANS FACE HOURLY ON THE JOB…..AND SOMETIMES AFTER. I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY NEWS-HOUNDING PARALLELS HERE, THAT WE CAN RELATE TO WHAT THE MAYOR OF TORONTO, FOR EXAMPLE, IS DEALING WITH AT PRESENT, IN HIS ONGOING DISPUTE WITH CERTAIN MEDIA OPERATIONS. THE RIGORS OF BEING A COUNCILLOR IN TORONTO, FOR EXAMPLE, IN TERMS OF DEALING WITH THE PRESS CORP, ARE TO THE EXPONENT OF TEN, AS COMPARED TO BEING A LOCAL REPRESENTATIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK WE'RE LUCKY IN SOME WAYS, BUT DISADVANTAGED IN OTHERS. I SIDE WITH THE PRESS, AND THAT SHOULDN'T BE ANY SURPRISE; BUT NOT BECAUSE I THINK COUNCILLORS SHOULD BE HOUNDED, OR INTRUDED UPON CONSTANTLY FOR COMMENTS.  BUT BECAUSE A COMPETITIVE MEDIA STOPS MAKING GRIP AND GRIN PHOTOGRAPHS, THE CAT'S ARSE, AND REPLACES IT WITH EDITORIAL COPY INSPIRED BY OLD FASHIONED INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING. FOR ALL THE MEDIA TAKES, AS CRITICISM, FROM THE POLITICIANS WHO HATE THEM, WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO EXPOSE WRONG DOING AND CORRUPTION AROUND THE WORLD, AND BRING INJUSTICE TO THE FOREFRONT, DESERVES SOME PRAISE FOR AT LEAST THE PRACTICE OF DUE DILIGENCE. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS OF COURSE. SO WHEN I SUGGEST, AS I DID IN AN EARLIER BLOG, THAT COUNCILLORS HERE ARE FORTUNATE THE COMPETITION FOR NEWS, ISN'T AS FIERCE AS IT WAS TWENTY OR THIRTY YEARS AGO, I'M NOT KIDDING. IF I WAS IN THE SAME POSITION, AS I HELD FOR MANY YEARS, I WOULD BE FAR MORE INTRUSIVE THAN THE LOCAL PRESS TODAY. AND COUNCILLORS WOULD BE FORCED, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, TO DEAL WITH UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONING. THERE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE KNOWN. AND IF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TRUSTED THE MEDIA, AND OPENED UP AS THEY SHOULD, THEY WOULD FIND THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF VALUABLE INSIGHT. TRANSPARENCY ISN'T CONDITIONAL ON WHETHER YOU LIKE THE PRESS OR NOT. THE BIGGEST MISTAKE I SEE NOW, AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL, IS A GENERAL UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW THE MEDIA TO HAVE THEIR WEEKLY, OR MONTHLY Q & A SESSION, WITH THE MAYOR, AND COUNCILLORS. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU READ A CANDID, NO HOLDS BARRED INTERVIEW WITH A GRAVENHURST CONCILLOR? HAVE YOU WONDERED WHY? I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORLD "MUZZLED," BECAUSE IT MAY BE THE SHORTFALL OF THE PRESS, THAT THESE INTERVIEWS HAVE NOT HAPPENED; BUT IT IS MORE NOTICEABLE WITH THIS NEW COUNCIL, THAN I HAVE SEEN IN DECADES. WHAT IS WRONG HERE, IS THAT ANY DISENT IS BEING HASHED OUT IN PRIVATE, AND NOT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC. CAN THESE COUNCILLORS TRULY BE ON-BOARD WITH WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE BUDGET, AND RECREATION CENTRE PROBLEMS, SUCH THAT THEY ARE UNWILLING TO "GO ROGUE," BITCH A LITTLE BIT, OR TALK TO THE PRESS ON THEIR OWN. THEY DON'T NEED THE PERMISSION OF COUNCIL, TO REPRESENT THEIR CONCERNS TO THE PUBLIC. GRAVENHURST COUNCIL, AS I'VE NOTED BEFORE, IS GIVING EVERY APPEARANCE OF BEING A POLITICAL CABINET, NOT INDIVIDUALS WITH THEIR OWN OPINIONS TO VENT. EVEN IF THEY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING, THEY ARE, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, INVISIBLE. THEY SHOULD KNOW THIS, BECAUSE THE ONLY ONE GETTING ANY SERIOUS INK THESE DAYS, ON A REGULAR BASIS, IS THE MAYOR. 

     I HAVE BEEN ALWAYS BEEN A NEWS HOUND. LONG BEFORE I BECAME A REPORTER FOR THE LOCAL PRESS, I WAS ADDICTED TO THE NEWS OF THE DAY. I AM A HEAVY CONSUMER OF PRINT NEWS, AND SUZANNE KNOWS TO ALLOW ME MY EXCESSES, WITH TELEVISION NEWS, AND RADIO NEWS SPOTS IF I'M IN THE CAR. FROM MY OWN YEARS AS A REPORTER /EDITOR, AND FEATURE WRITER EVER SINCE, I HAVE MADE IT MY BUSINESS TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. I THRIVE ON CRITICISM AND COUNTERPOINT, NOT ON CONTROVERSY. AND I HAVE NO PARTICULAR AGENDA, OR ANY KIND OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION TO HARP-ON ABOUT, FOR SOME UNSPECIFIED GAIN. I'M JUST DOING WHAT I'VE BEEN HONING SINCE MY FIRST MAJOR WRITING GIG, IN DOWNTOWN MACTIER, A LONG, LONG TIME AGO. WRITING. BECAUSE I LOVE IT. BUT I ALSO HAVE A GREAT RESPECT FOR THE MEDIA, AND THE ROLL IT PLAYS, IN KEEPING US INFORMED. I'M A HUGE ADVOCATE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. AND I DON'T APPROVE OF ANY MEDIA SOURCE, POUNDING ON SOMETHING OR SOMEONE, OUT OF A PERSONAL VENDETTA. IT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE, THAT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SOME ACTIVITIES, AND EVEN INACTIVITIES OF GRAVENHURST COUNCIL, BUT I'M CERTAINLY NOT INTERESTED IN HAVING ANY COUNCILLOR RESIGN BECAUSE OF WHAT I PERCEIVE IS A SHORTFALL. WE ALL HAVE WEAKNESSES AND STRENGTHS. THE PROBLEM FOR COUNCILLORS, IS THAT THEY ARE NOT PROPERLY TRAINED TO HANDLE WORSE CASE SCENARIOS. WHAT WE HAVE IS BLUNT "ON THE JOB TRAINING," AND THAT IS ALWAYS A PRE-CURSOR OF DIRE CONSEQUENCE. I'LL BET A GOODLY PERCENTAGE OF GRAVENHURST COUNCILLORS TODAY, WOULD HAVE RECONSIDERED RUNNING FOR OFFICE, IN THE LAST MUNICIPAL ELECTION, BECAUSE OF THE LOCAL TURMOIL OF THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF. THEY MIGHT EVEN SUGGEST THAT PEOPLE LIKE ME, WHO ARE FREE FLOWING WITH CRITICISM, BUT SHORT ON ACTION, ARE PART OF THE REASON, THE TERM OF OFFICE HAS BEEN SO TUMULTUOUS.  I REMEMBER SO CLEARLY, TELLING CANDIDATES I MET, AND RUNNING BLOGS, OFFERING THE OPINION, THAT THE FOUR YEARS THEY WERE GOING TO SERVE, COULD BE THE MOST VOLATILE IN GRAVENHURST HISTORY. TELL ME I WAS WRONG!

     There is a meet and greet tomorrow, with the Mayor of Gravenhurst, at the newly refurbished, and very, very expensive recreation centre. I'm not going to be able to attend this Q & A session, because Saturdays are always "on-the-road days" for our antique business, and at least one councillors knows this to be an honest excuse for my absence. Just because I'm not there, doesn't imply I'm not interested in meeting the Mayor, and seeking out answers to some very pressing questions. In abstention, I would ask one question through this blog, that could be answered by any one of our elected officials…..all of them in fact, because we're not dealing with a political party here. Each council member, you see, is entitled a personal opinion, of council business……at least business that is not a personnel matter, or some contractual / legal situation, otherwise needing a freedom of information request. My question is, "Will the present Council of the Town of Gravenhurst, assign responsibility of this presently identified roofing problem, at the Recreation Centre, to the previous Council, and specific Councillors part of a select committee, who voted for the two roof union, versus the one roof, one building strategy? With more than $4.5 million dollars having been spent, over the original budget, this latest news is a pretty big straw on an old camel's back.

      There is a point here, for all of us stakeholders in Gravenhurst, to come together, and figure out how to stop reckless spending. There will be some affiliates of council, who will use the argument, that a goodly percentage of the pool and revamping project was paid for by the federal and provincial governments. I've heard and read this a couple of times, and on each occasion I've had to stop, and re-read the paragraph. I really think that some town staff and councillors, view grant money differently than what comes directly out of town coffers. It's as if they don't see this grant allocation cash, as tax dollars, raised from the citizenry of Ontario and Canada. The governments didn't just print-it, by the wheelbarrow load, to help us build a swell new recreation centre. The taxpayers of our country and our province helped out quite a bit. And we spent it all, and more, getting this project finished. Well almost finished. We had so little regard for budget, that we bypassed it like it wasn't even relevant. If you had been doing this as a private project, and not on the backs of ratepayers, how astute would you have been to finishing on or below budget. If Gravenhurst Councillors, and town staff feel the public has been unfair, in their criticism thus far, it's based on this very thing. When we, in our civilian lives, go over budget, the bank comes calling. We have to manage our projects according to fiscal restraint.

    Over-reaching and bending the rules of sensible proportion, began in this fashion, at the rec centre, when the water table wasn't considered particularly relevant to anything, but it was regardless.  While we know how projects handled by government can go over budget, and by a crap-load, an extra five million bucks does seem a tad high. Don't you think?

     This is the problem of accepting a project on a hurry-up-offense. We were not ready for this project, and although the town has wanted a pool for years, it was generally accepted, a free standing, pool and auditorium would be the best approach. I've heard that these plans exist, and by all accounts, it was a pretty well thought-out proposal. In fact, I have also heard that it was proposed for the same property, as the Centennial Centre, but just not a connected super centre. The grandiose plan was to make a mega-centre like Bracebridge and Huntsville have……but there is that little consideration……. of having a totally new building, in those two towns, versus a strange and cumbersome union of old and new in Gravenhurst. Someone or some group, decided against the one roof fits all plan, and opted instead, for two sections to meet-up, for its shelter integrity. Apparently, this is what haunts us today, and could be costly. Who cancelled-out the idea of a free standing pool, on the recreation centre property? I'm not going to offer an apology for this question, because it is the root problem here, of a recreation centre upgrade, that is costing us a fortune and it hasn't even officially opened yet.

     The problems with the Recreation Centre began when we jumped onboard a project without fully appreciating what it could mean in expense down the road. The same was done with the new Town Hall. The attitude of  "We'll deal with problems when they arise," is a fair enough attitude, except when the potential of problems occurring is low, because parties behind the project have thought this all out well in advance. We've found out that the risk factor on this project was well beyond what most ratepayers assumed was acceptable. The attitude seemed to be, "Let's build it and see what happens." We're still writing the last chapter which apparently is going to be a long and precarious one, lasting well beyond any official opening. Things keep happening that date back to decisions before the first excavation on the property. When the word "mitigate" is used by any one connected with the rec. centre, I cringe at what that means. To me, it represents, "We're trying to do it as cheap and efficiently as possible, but maybe not." If you hear or read "mitigate" enough times, it loses the definition it was afforded in the dictionary.

     When these behemoth centers are built, on the public dime, most ratepayers expect to get some bad news. Like when you take your car in for a new muffler, and by happenstance, the mechanics find you also need some other upgrades or equipment replacements. It happens a lot, and if you own a car, you know what that fear and loathing can do to your heart and soul, when the bill is placed in your hand, and it's two to three hundred dollars more than you expected. It doesn't mean the mechanics ripped you off, but that what you had budgeted, and what was incurred as expense, wasn't planned for…..and potentially not available to spend. When you consider a potentially five million dollar over-run, on a twenty plus million dollar project, it's very much like being in the service bay for a new muffler, and getting a transmission, and new gas tank added on top. Most of us, in that circumstance, would pay up, and then weep once back in the car. What makes many of us mad, in this community, is that the town has an attitude that an over-run is just the cost of doing business…..and building something we couldn't afford in the first place.

     There's no hiding from this now. Councillors are going to have a wickedly difficult last half of their council term, if the problems keep manifesting, and the drain of money continues. While they have been reluctant to assess blame here, sooner or later, councillors may have to break rank to save themselves. While they will most likely be asked to stand for the victory photo, when the grand opening finally happens, there is also the very real chance, that they are also going to have to stand-up and be counted, when the ratepayers come for blood……..if this project can't be brought under control financially……and soon.

     There are many citizens in our community, who knew what the plan should have been from the start. We should have been fundraising on our own. We've had years to think about this project, and there was a general consensus, that we would have to pay, via our capability at fundraising, for the luxury it would afford us. Instead, we got caught-up by "rare" opportunity, and the near-instant availability of grants to make it all happen. Instead of being intimate stewards of a project we financed by fundraising, over time, we became spectators of a strictly government project, that has never been right from the beginning. I guarantee you, if like the old days, we had been the masters of our domain on this, from the beginning, our citizen overseers would have found and avoided pitfalls, like a high water table that was pretty well known, and been far more determined to bring the project in on budget. If they were working with money our citizens raised, specifically for the pool, there would have been far more attention placed on perfection, and getting our money's worth. I'm sorry there may be councillors who don't agree with this. But there was a disconnect on the rec. centre project from the start, and far fewer citizen members involved, than should have been, to protect our stake in the investment.

     No it's not like Toronto. Councillors here won't be scared to go out in their yards, in case a reporter is tucked into the bushes for some candid photographs. But they will have to face the heat no matter what, and they may even run into a news scrum they can't duck. All is not peachy at town hall. We don't want it to be. That would mean there is no opposing opinions. This isn't good for democracy.

     Thank you for joining today's blog. Please visit again.