Civic complex campaign costs $373,538

By Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star - April 16, 2008

Vernonites forked out considerable dollars for a civic complex that hasn’t materialized. Council received a staff report Monday that shows that $373,538 was spent on the proposed civic complex through the failed alternative approval process last summer and the defeated referendum in January. “There is nothing to show for it,” said Tony Stamboulieh, spokesman for the Vernon Taxpayers Association which successfully campaigned against the city. “This (costs) reinforces the perception and reality that a small group of insiders decided what will go through and taxpayers be damned. Those days are over.” Of the total figure, $110,000 was covered by Okanagan Regional Library, with the city’s cost being $263,538. The expenses include $167,137 paid to CEI Architecture, $30,295 to MQN Architects, $53,330 to MCW Consultants and $27,000 to Spiegel Skillen and Associates. In terms of public relations and advertising, $27,961 was spent. Of that, $20,861 went to The Morning Star.

The financial details have reinforced Coun. Barry Beardsell’s opposition to the process the city followed for the complex. “I find it excessive especially when added to what was spent by the previous cultural committee. That was about $260,000,” he said. “It’s money down the drain and apologies are due to the taxpayers.” However, Mayor Wayne Lippert defends the final tab. “It’s the cost of doing business and taking information forward,” he said. “It didn’t go down the drain. A lot of good information was brought together over the years by this council and other councils.” That view is also supported by Coun. Juliette Cunningham. “You need to pay architects if you are going to have an idea of design and costs before going to the public.” Cunningham believes some of the concepts developed through the planning process could be used in future. “We still need an art gallery,” she said.

---------------------

Digging deep By Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star - April 16, 2008

It was likely just a simple mistake, but the placement of a staff report may have people questioning transparency at Vernon city hall. And certainly my eyebrows were raised when I delved into Monday’s council agenda looking for the report on library complex costs. Anticipating that it would be near the front, I was shocked when I kept digging deeper and deeper into the 343-page document. I found myself going past the report on a special sign to honour sister cities, the appointment of the chief election officer and a letter from Senator Mobina Jaffer on World Malaria Day. But the costs for a controversial complex that was shot down twice by residents was no where to be found in the main body of the agenda. Eventually, though, the staff memorandum surfaced on page 285 — tucked under the catch-all category of information items. For those of you not familiar with council agendas, information items is the elephant’s graveyard. It is littered with insignificant letters from a multitude of government agencies and the eye-closing minutes of advisory committees. Nothing important is generally found there and rarely is there any discussion about them. They are received, filed and forgotten.

But there was the report on complex costs, right along with a letter from the B.C. Egg Marketing Board on consumer choice and the City of Vancouver on funding for municipal police forces (Vernon uses the RCMP). With the civic complex issue dominating Vernon politics for almost a year, and $373,538 in taxpayers’ money being forked out, one has to wonder why the report was placed in the agenda the way it was. Critics swear up and down that council was trying to hide something. “It really says transparency be damned — ‘We’ll get something out and hope no one sees it,’” said Coun. Barry Beardsell, the lone elected official to oppose the civic complex plan. Mayor Wayne Lippert, who puts the agenda together with staff, denies there were any tricks involved. “It was an oversight more than anything,” he said. Lippert went on to say about the report that, “it was an information item that council requested.” And yes that is technically true. But in my years of covering city hall, I can’t ever remember such an important memorandum being handled in this way. And it should have been considered important not only because of the substantial dollar figure involved, but because council has taken a significant public relations hit over openness during the past year. Many residents accused council of originally trying to slide the civic complex through the back door with the alternate approval process, and simply wanting residents to approve paying for a design that had already been determined by bureaucrats and consultants. Not for a minute am I suggesting that there was anything under-handed about the placement of the staff report or that games were being played. But the fact that it was virtually at the back of the agenda will certainly give conspiracy theorists something to talk about.

---------------------

Don Quixote Note: For those of you who missed my posting on Friday April 11 the report is reproduced again. (CLICK on image to enlarge)

Also there was a report at the seldom attended COW Meeting at 8;40 on Council Day and one of the items was the Grant report.

Part of this report referred to the library and may add fuel for the conspiracy theorists fire:

Two $1,000,000 under MCS/ MRIF each for the Library Project dated Jan 31/07 were DECLINED on Dec.18/07. This is interesting because both the Referendum brochure and all those full page Civic Complex Advertisements in January/08 contained the following: How much money has been raised through grants? 'The City of Vernon and the Library have applied for over $2.8 million for project construction. If the referendum is successful these monies will substantially reduce the level of borrowing.' (You reconcile these two items, I can't !)