Transparency – Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria

Lack of transparency at Langford

Team Grumpy Taxpayers — Sun, 29 Aug 2021 15:22:03 +0000

Why was the maintenance contract for Langford extended without tender?

Langford council has quietly renewed a parks, boulevards and trails maintenance contract for $2.3 million annually for five years without public tender or bid.

Grumpy Taxpayer$ made repeated requests to the administration for any goods and services purchase policy used by the city and received no response. Nor would they confirm the maintenance contract went out for tender or bid.

Victoria Contracting and Municipal Maintenance Corp. (VCMMC) has been responsible for the maintenance of all City-owned parks, boulevards, and trails in Langford since 1992. The company also provides services for View Royal, Highlands and the District of Sooke.

“Since the contract apparently never went to public tender, taxpayers are wondering if the city got the best deal possible?” ask John Treleaven, chair of Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria.

“Langford council has a reputation for lack of transparency with the taxpayer – this is the latest example. To be very clear though, our issue is failed council governance and not VCMMC itself.”

The 24-page VCMMC contract allows for annual cost of living increases and an option for renewal for another five years.

“Are other goods and services purchased without public tendering or bidding? Is it unreasonable to expect a local government with revenue of $100 million in 2020 not to have a policy guiding purchases? Why were questions asking ‘Is a purchasing policy under consideration?’ unanswered?” says Treleaven.

The City of Victoria has had a purchasing policy in place since 2016 with the goal of ‘obtaining the best value for all funds expended.’ They are committed to open, transparent, fair and accountable access to City business utilizing leading practices and adhering to legislation and applicable trade agreements, according to the city.

Victoria also maintains a competitive bidding process in accordance with municipal and provincial laws. It adds, “We are conscious of our responsibility in the expenditure of public funds, including the acquisition of goods and services amounting to millions of dollars annually.”

Under the document library section, there’s nothing listed for public scrutiny on Langford’s website concerning bids, contracts, competitive bidding, procurement, purchasing policy or policies. Neither is there any reference to B.C. Bid, a provincial government website that allows municipalities to advertise bidding opportunities for a wide range of goods and services. That’s a service that Langford has used in the past.

READ MORE:

Bid system,City of Victoria, 2021.

Purchasing policy for City of Victoria, City of Victoria, 2020.

Improving local government procurement processes through: Procurement Policy Enhancements, Procurement Performance Metrics and Reporting, and Vendor Performance Management, Auditor General of Local Government, B.C., 2016.

Available for Media Interviews:

John Treleaven, Chair, Grumpy Taxpayer$

treleavengroup@shaw.ca

250.656.7899, cell 250.588.7899

Stan Bartlett, Past Chair, Grumpy Taxpayer$

grumpytaxpayers@gmail.com

250-477-9907

Will it sit on a dusty shelf? Report on elected officials conduct issues commended

Team Grumpy Taxpayers — Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:00:46 +0000

Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria applauds the Working Group on Responsible Conduct (WGRC) for its creation of a resource to provide guidance on ways to prevent conduct issues by local elected officials, and how best to deal with them.

The 46-page Forging the Path to Responsible Conduct in Your Local Government is a critical resource for local governments, a joint initiative of the WGRC that included the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM), the Local Government Management Association of British Columbia, and the B.C. Ministry of Municipal Affairs.

“This is not a report that should sit on a shelf and gather dust,” says John Treleaven, chair of Grumpy Taxpayer$. “Good governance must include local elected officials holding themselves accountable for rare instances of bad behavior and damage to credibility.”

“It’s not good enough to say ‘bad conduct will be dealt with by voters sometime in the distance future.’ Bad conduct impacts the reputation of everyone and brings local government into disrepute. It also scares voters away from the polls at election time,” Treleaven says.

Of note, City of Victoria council is at an early stage of conducting a governance review, so we would urge them to embrace some of the suggestions in the guide.

The guide provides advice on fostering responsible conduct, maintaining good governance and resolving conduct issues for those who serve on Councils and Boards. It also includes considerations for local governments who wish to establish an enforcement process within a Code of Conduct.

We agree with Josie Osborne, Minister of Municipal Affairs who says, “This guide is an important step that will help local governments develop clear codes of conduct, along with effective enforcement practices and solid governance structures, so they can better serve the people who rely on their leadership.”

READ MORE:

Forging the Path to Responsible Conduct in Your Local Government , WGRC, Press Release, April 2021.

Councillor wants review on how Victoria is governed, Times Colonist, Oct. 22, 2020.

When councils misbehave, there are remedies, Grumpy Taxpayer$, Jan. 2021.

Improve municipal transparency by adopting best practices

Team Grumpy Taxpayers — Sun, 26 Aug 2018 15:38:12 +0000

While most people associate glass, ice or plastic, with the word ‘transparency,’ Grumpy Taxpayer$ think about easy and complete access to local government information.

In our view, the money government spends is ours and those in temporary charge of our municipality are our employees. It follows that it’s the responsibility of councils and municipalities to tell us clearly how much of our money they are spending and on what.

In an era of poor voter turnout and weak political engagement at a local level, anything a municipality can do to soothe cranky taxpayers and help improve transparency, is a good thing. We urge the new councils to adopt these six best practices:

It’s called the ‘dashboard’ and it greatly simplifies finding out how your councillor or CRD director voted on every motion that’s brought forward and decision made. In April 2016 Vancouver City Council instituted a Council Voting Dashboard, so that interested parties can examine the voting record on each item (either in favor, opposed, abstained, absent or in conflict of interest). It also lets voters know if the councillor showed up for the vote.

Of course, meeting minutes and, in most cases, video archives, also show how councillors vote. The problem is that reading through minutes of multiple meetings or watching multiple archived council meetings is extremely time consuming for people.

The task of updating this record is performed by municipal legislative services, so it’s easy to maintain once set up and it could be done by the same person who records the minutes. The City of Victoria has recently approved implementing this valuable tool likely next year.

Most taxpayers are unaware that annual financial disclosure statements are submitted each year in mid January by the incumbent mayor and councillors (as well as municipal nominees and employees) pursuant to the BC Financial Disclosure Act.

The legislation requires that politicians list income, real property, liabilities, corporate assets and investments with the aim of preventing conflicts of interest.

The City of Vancouver is one of the few jurisdictions that provides the public with yearly links to the financial disclosure statements on its municipal website.

In the interests of transparency, Grumpy Taxpayer$ urges municipalities, electoral districts and the CRD to follow suit and provide easy access by posting disclosure statements annually for the convenience of the public.

Politicians have a tendency to close doors and go in-camera too often, with the result that the public never knows what happened.

The City of Vancouver makes a practice of posting in-camera decisions and reports on a regular basis.They’re released because they are no longer considered sensitive, but this practice is not necessarily followed by every municipality.

By law, municipalities are required to compile a Statement of Financial Information (SOFI) annually that includes council remuneration and expenses.

But in North Vancouver, mayors and councillors expenses are posted quarterly instead of many months after the fact. That practice is far more timely for the inquiring mind.

Council agendas can run up to an astounding 2,000 pages. The taxpayer doesn’t have time or patience to wade through to find items of interest.

The City of Victoria sends out a public brief ‘Council highlights report’ that outlines important items with convenient links to further information. Why in heck aren’t other jurisdictions – particularly the larger one’s – adopting this low-cost practice?

The annual report, financial statement and annual budget are the three critical documents to learn what your council is doing with your tax dollars.

In our view, annual reports shouldn’t be full of public relations fluff, but provide important and understandable information about what’s going on. Complicated and highly detailed financial statements should be presented of course, but in there also needs to be a brief, understandable version. Budgets should also be presented in a summation format so as to be more understandable.

Links for all of these key documents should be prominently and permanently displayed on a local government website homepage, not buried.

In sum, better transparency in municipal affairs leads to more and better quality information for the public, along with increased involvement and scrutiny.

It will also result in increased respect for the political process and better value for our tax dollars.