Did I Mention on the Way to Vegas?

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

It just doesn't seem to stop.....

On the way to Las Vegas with his wife Mr. Anderson stopped in Halifax on October 19 and charged $348.32 for dinner at the Keg Restaurant.... that's an invoice for $298.32 plus a tip of the taxpayers money for $50.00!.... Even though he had already billed SWSDA on his travel claim for his daily allowance for breakfast, lunch and dinner..... Reminds me of the line from that old swing standard ... "great, if you can get it .... and you can get it .... if you try....."!!

Is SWSDA a rogue RDA?

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------


Something is not right!

I'm not looking to find blame but rather to inform the public and raise issues about the management of SWSDA with hopes that the exercise will produce change and positive results.... to do so the following kinds of things have to stop and/or be better supervised.

On September 28, 29 and 30 Mr. Anderson made the following meal expense claims.

QUESTION
Why are taxpayers in our nine municipalities paying for meals of ACOA and the MLA? Doesn't make sense to me and most government travel regulations would not permit it to happen. Here's the documentation we have.....

Sept. 28 Meeting $214.35
September 29, Meeting MLA & New Business $160.01
September 30, Meeting ACOA $252.06

PLUS

A claim for $511.01 with the notation "September to October 18/05 Meeting Expenses See Receipts"

Receipts provided with this claim include:
a)an invoice from Rudder's Seafood in Yarmouth on September 28, 2005 at nearly 11:00 at night for $177.95 with a $40.00 tip, for a total of $217.95;
b) an invoice from Rudder's Seafood in Yarmouth on September 29, 2005 for $130.01 plus a handwritten tip of $30.00;
c) an invoice on September 28, 2005 from the Rodd Grand in Yarmouth for 3 White Russians, 2 Corona and 3 Seagrams Crown for $41.70 with a tip of $8.30 for a total of $50.00.

I was unable to find a receipt for the $252.06 meal claim for meeting with ACOA reported in the expense claim but assume it was also for meals/drinks in Yarmouth.

However, I did find:

a) an invoice from the Rodd Grand Hotel in Yarmouth on September 21, 2005 at 0:38 AM in the morning for 6 Glenfiddich and 6 Cointreau for a total expense of $58.72 plus a handwritten amount including tip of $12.28 bringing the total to $70.00;

b) an invoice for September 20, 2005 at Rudder's Seafood for $74.06 with a handwritten tip of $17.00 for a total of $91.06;

c) an illegible recipt for $136.00 on September 20, 2005;

d) a handwritten receipt on plain paper dated Sepetember 23, 2005 for $25.00 with the notation "Golf Club";

e) a handwritten receipt on plain paper dated Sepetember 20, 2005 for $50.00 with the notation "Golf Club";

f) a handwritten receipt on plain paper with no date for $25.00 with the notation "Frank Anderson, 7 coolers = $31.50, 1 Beer = $4.00" with the total of $35.50 crossed out and a new total added of "$45.00"

g) an illegible receipt with a total of $64.34 pencilled in;

h) a receipt from Pizza Delight at 17:14 hours in Yarmouth dated October 14, 2005 for $22.00; and, last but not least......

i) an odd receipt from the Rodd Colony dated October 3, 2005 at 8:58 PM which reads:

Corona (2 @ $4.75) $ 9.50
Lobster Sandwich $ 8.95
Extra Fries $ 1.25
Drambuie (4 @$4.40) $17.60
Large Draft $ 3.91
Total $47.39
Balance Due $47.39
Handwritten is $ 8.00
Handwritten is $55.39

It appears that only one person ate .... so the question is ..... was that person the only one who consumed the 2 coronas, 4 drambuies and the large draft or were there other folks there who watched the one person eat? And..... if this was for only one person, who was that person and why are taxpayers paying for it?

QUESTIONS

1. Are these expenses for booze and food justified.... what are we paying for and why.... and more importantly, how is this helping socio-economic development in our communities?

2. Does anyone approve these expenditures before or after the fact?

3. Is the Chair of SWSDA involved in providing overview on Mr. Anderson's expenses.

4. How effectively is business conducted in this booze filled atmosphere and what is the image projected of our communities to potential investors, businesses and other government agencies?

I am told that when Darian Huskilson was Treasurer of SWSDA he demanded that Mr. Anderson show him his travel expenses and Mr. Huskilson was rebuffed. I am also told that is the reason Mr. Huskilson was removed as Treasurer of SWSDA. Does the new Treasurer of SWSDA review the CEO's expenses?

Readers have been asking.... Why aren't the Board members assuming their responsibilities?

I would ask our readers.... How do we get SWSDA's Board and the Federal, Provincial and Municipal governments to impose proper management controls over this out of control development agency?

Any ideas.... we'd love to hear them.

Unrelenting Pace for SWSDA CEO

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

Here's another example of the terrible conditions under which Mr. Anderson has to work.

On June 9, 2005 Mr. Anderson was back at the Triangle Ale House ... AGAIN.......

I mean the poor guy had already billed SWSDA (and local taxpayers) for breakfast, lunch and dinner and here he was again, forced to spend more time that same day in the Triangle Ale House where he reportedly paid Debbie $58.13 plus a $12.00 tip (total $70.13 at nearly 8:00 PM) for the time spent there..... (Its amongst his expense receipts as additional to his per diem charge for meals.)

Wonder if the poor fella had to have dinner twice, endure some of the liquid sustenance of the Ale House .... again ..... or was he just there to meet with someone with a business opportunity for our nine municipalities.... Either way.... being a development specialist is not easy .... is it?!?

Indeed ... some would argue Mr. Anderson earns every penny we or anyone else pays him..... Maybe we could make it easier for him and arrange for the Province to provide him with meeting rooms for these business meetings when he is in Halifax.... It would save him from these obligations to meet in bars and restaurants... not to mention the savings to taxpayers.

THEN AGAIN....

In Yarmouth where taxpayers have just finished building a big new set of office facilities for our RDA, Mr. Anderson appears to be forced to regularly embibe and dine out at local restaurants on a regular basis to conduct the affairs of the SWSDA! There just doesn't seem to be any easy answers for poor Mr. Anderson...... (;-(

NO BUSINESS IN ENGLAND.....

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

To the reader who wanted to know what business Mr. Anderson was conducting in England the answer is simple......NONE!

HE STOPPED THERE ON HIS WAY TO EUROPE AND AS FAR AS I CAN TELL DID NOT LEAVE THE AIRPORT THAT MORNING..........

RDA ACCOUNTING RULES IGNORED

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

A reader asked about SWSDA accountants and here is what I know.

SWSDA claims to be an RDA. The SWSDA CEO's business partner (see YARCO listing with the Registry of Joint Stocks)Richard Hurlburt in an article defending SWSDA against a call for an independent audit a while back claimed that SWSDA provided audits like every other RDA. That was when Mr. Anderson's private partner was the Minister of the Department of Economic Development. ( I wonder if that is the private company that just had Yarmouth approve and pay for new water and sewage lines to the property.)

FACT # 1 - The Regional Community Development Act states:

"Records and statements

9 (1) An agency shall keep proper books of account and records, which shall be open to the public for inspection upon request.

(2) An agency shall annually cause the accounts of the agency to be examined and audited by a registered municipal auditor who may be paid such remuneration as the board determines."(my bolding)

FACT # 2 - Yarmouth accounting firm Wheelans White are and have been SWSDA auditors for more than a decade.

FACT # 3 - Last time I checked Wheelans White were not a "registered municipal auditor" in accordance with the Act.

Of course SWSDA might argue that they are not incorporated under the Regional Community Development Act. They are a society incorporated under the Society's Act.

SURPRISE .... SURPRISE..... THEY DON'T COMPLY WITH THE SOCIETIES ACT EITHER!

The Societies Act states.......

"Restriction if special legislation
(2) Where any Act, other than the Companies Act, provides for the incorporation of a society for a particular object, no society shall be incorporated under this Act for that object. R.S., c. 435, s. 3.

Since the Regional Communities Development Act provides for the incorporation of RDA's, SWSDA should not be incorporated under the Societies Act.

The rationale for ensuring that SWSDA remained a society was spelled out by Mr. Anderson in an interview in the Vanguard more than a year ago when he explained that SWSDA has chosen to be a Society because as a Society SWSDA was not obliged to provide the public with access to internal documents.

Justice Hood's Decision..... Priceless.......!!

Really Think So... !?!

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

In the Blink of an Eye.....

One of our readers has suggested that the missing Shelburne travel expenses of our erstwhile CEO may have been charged to the diminishing "maintenance fund" for the Boys School. Smart!

Don't laugh.... it is possible.... $8,844.04 was reported as travel expenses in SWSDA's latest accounting of expenses they claim should be attributed to the Boys School Maintenance Fund. Our reader says he/she has raised the issue with one of the Board members.... if we get a response I'll let you know.....

IN THE MEANTIME..... and while we are on the subject of the infamous Boys School Funds.....

A couple weeks a go I read in the Team Shelburne Meeting minutes that Team Shelburne thinks there is $791,000 remaining from the proceeds of the sale combined with the Maintenance Fund which the Consent Order directed SWSDA to place in GIC's or a segregated interest bearing account.

Tonight while listening to the town of Shelburne's Council Meeting I heard Shelburne's Mayor refer to the town of Shelburne's share as being $134,000 ... which was to have been the Town's share of the $791,000 Mr. Anderson claimed was remaining at the end of July 2008.

I guess neither Team Shelburne nor the Town have been paying attention. Wanna know a secret...... ?

Mr. Anderson only set aside $716,000 and has not accrued any interest to the monies in question since 2008.

Wonder what he's doing with the interest that was supposed to accrue to the GIC's or the segregated interest bearing account? I sure do......

In fact, that is only part of the reason why I've initiated Contempt proceedings against SWSDA for not doing as directed by the Consent Order. We received approval from the Court to proceed last winter...... Our contempt case against SWSDA related to the Boys School monies will be heard in the Supreme Court here in Shelburne on October 18, 2009.

You should attend if you can.....it should be interesting.....

Disappearing Travel Expense Claims

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

Now you see it..... now you don't.

My request to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia was for Frank Anderson's Travel Expense Claims for the period April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006. On November 28, 2008 Justice Hood concluded that SWSDA was a municipal body and subject to the provisions of the Municipal Government Act's Freedom of Information provisions. In January I finally received 147 pages of claims and supporting receipts. Those documents were to have included .... ALL .....
of Mr. Anderson's travel expenses for fiscal year 2005/2006.

They do provide details about Mr. Anderson's travel to Europe, Las Vegas, Ottawa, Clare, Toronto, the Valley, Halifax, Truro and assorted other locations........ including more than $25,000.00 in expense claims not counting Mr. Anderson's airfares for that year.

Soooo..... what's missing!?!

You guessed it.... ALL TRAVEL EXPENSES TO SHELBURNE COUNTY ... for that year.....

Does anyone think Mr. Anderson didn't travel to Shelburne County that year?

Does anyone believe he did but did not charge for his travel to Shelburne County?

Does anyone believe that Mr. Anderson just forgot to include his travel expenses to and for Shelburne County during that entire year as required by Justice Hood's decision?

Naw.... Mr. Anderson wouldn't ignore the Judge's Order.... that would be contemptuous of the Supreme Court's Order! .... Or would he?

So, how did he get reimbursed for all his travel to and for Shelburne County in 2005/2006?

Think you've got the answer?
If you do, send it to everyone on this blog by submitting your best guess as a comment. I'll let you know if I think you've guessed right! Alternatively ask your representative on the SWSDA Board (;-).... if they don't know maybe they can ask Mr. Anderson....

Between Flights at Heathrow Airport

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

Must Have Been a Long Dry Flight!

Amongst the receipts included in the SWSDA CEO's expenses is a receipt from the Terminal 2 Tavern at Heathrow Airport. Looks like between flights on June 16, 2005 at 9:00 A.M. in the morning folks wet their whistle as soon as they got to jolly old England.... cost to taxpayers in Shelburne, Yarmouth and Clare...... $277.45 US in 2005

Wonder who else embibed at this early hour?

WHO INCURRED THE EXPENSE?

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

Subject: Receipt just before midnight on June 22, 2005 for €278.30 ($463.63 Cdn.)

Why is there a receipt for nearly $500.00 charged to Jason Hollet's room included in Mr. Anderson's expense claim? Why is there no explanation included with this receipt?

Was this for drinks? For Food? How many people were involved? Why didn't Mr. Hollet claim the expense himself?

WHO'S IN CHARGE?

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

GREAT QUESTION..... NOT AN EASY ANSWER....

One of our readers wanted to know who Mr. Anderson reports to and whether any of his superiors are aware of the actions reported in this blog.

Mr. Anderson is identified as the CEO of SWSDA on their web page and in his correspondence. In theory, the CEO and all other staff of SWSDA work for the Board of Directors who represent the members of SWSDA. According to the bylaws of SWSDA the President or Chair of SWSDA is responsible for the day-to-day operations of SWSDA as directed by the Board.

Here's where it gets complicated.

Two different sources provide two different answers. The SWSDA web page and the Registry of Joint Stocks identify the following individuals as Directors of SWSDA.

RJSC - Charles LeBlanc - Phil LeBlanc - Roger King -
Charles Crosby - Rod Rose - Louise Halliday - Sherman Embree
Allain Lombard - Arnold LeBlanc - Cecil Brannen -
Darian Huskilson - Bob Redding - Gilles Robichaud - Allen Reid

WEB PAGE - Sherman Embree - Elizabeth Acker -
Cecil Brannen - Darian Huskilson - Louise Halliday - Bob Redding -
Rod Rose - Roger King - Phil Mooney - Charles LeBlanc -
Trevor Cunningham - Phil LeBlanc - Ronnie LeBlanc - Alain Lombard

While the RJSC listing is supposed to provide the legal listing of Directors it appears that SWSDA has not updated it as required since the election last fall and the naming of new reps by the municipalities. A quick review of the names shows that it does not reflect the changes in municipal governments and appointments since the last municipal elections.

Soooo..... my money is on the listing on the web page as probably the most accurate listing of Directors and the people responsible for supervising the CEO and knowing what is going on.

BTW.....

Also listed as "non-voting representatives" on the SWSDA Board are the following.

Shelley Bodge, Service Canada - Robert Maillet, Nova Scotia Office of Economic Development, Calvin Butler, Nova Scotia Business Inc. - Lisa Richard, ACOA - Mark Townsend, ACOA - Stephane Cyr, ACOA - Michael Comeau, ACOA - Gary Thomas, Barrington & Area Chamber of Commerce - Robin Nickerson, Yarmouth Chamber of Commerce - Patrick Melanson, Shelburne and Area Chamber of Commerce - Clyde De Viller, Conseil Acadien de Par-en-Bas - Michelle Comeau, Le Conseil development economique de la Nouvelle-Ecosse - Karl White, Nova Scotia Department of Community Services - Shelley Comeau, Nova Scotia Department of Community Services - Mike McGill, Nova Scotia Community College - Mary Thompson, Nova Scotia Community College - Chris Atwood, Community Business Development Centre, Yarmouth - Dixie Redmond, Community Business Development Centre, Shelburne - Chris d'Entremont, Argyle MLA - Sterling Belliveau, Shelburne MLA - Richard Hurlburt, Yarmouth MLA - Wayne GAudet, Clare MLA -Greg Kerr, West Nova MP - Gerald Keddy, South Shore MP.

PUBLIC ACCESS LIMITED ....
While my recent victory in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia now requires SWSDA to provide public access to their documents under the Municipal Government Act's Freedom of Information provisions, SWSDA has refused to open their meetings to the public. The only people with a right to observe SWSDA meetings are the Board of Directors listed above .... including what they euphemistically call "non-voting representatives".

People who are interested in knowing whether these folks know what the CEO is doing should ask the folks listed above. After all ... they are the Board of Directors and responsible for his actions.

HOPE THIS HELPS!

Psst...... Did I Mention Double Dipping?

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

You may recall that in my blog of April 20, 2009 I may have mentioned a $40.00 tip for a late evening expense of $130.65 incurred by Mr. Anderson. If you do, you may recall that I asked at the time what the $170.65 was for... now we know!

How do we know? Simple..... Mr. Anderson already had claimed his meal allowance for three meals for the 18th of May when the Triangle Ale House charges were incurred at 10:30 that night. At least that's what his expense claim for May 17, 18, 19 and 20 says. Soooo.... this must have been dinner and/or drinks for someone else.... wonder how many people? Someone should ask him.

Funny that this wasn't picked up by an ever-watchful member of the Board or the Executive or a bookeeper or SWSDA's accountant... of course since Mr. Anderson appears to approve his own expenses (just like the Cabinet Ministers)it would be hard for anyone to notice any irregularities.... if there were any of course!

Response to Arthur

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

A reader named Arthur wrote and asked about the benefits derived from the sale of the Boys School and the Former Naval Base and the role of the MacDonnell Group in these properties. Following is all I know about the present status of the two properties.

Boys School - Only tenant I know of in Boys School 21 buildings is the RRFB bottle recycling facility. I hear that plans were to make the Boys School a major entertainment venue but that appears to have fizzled out. Some of the land surrounding the Boys School has been clear cut. Can't see much else going on there. As I understand it the MacDonnell Group did two studies, a) study of possible uses of the Boys School, b) as well as a study of replacement costs for the facilities, buildings and over 200 acres of land - estimated at some $20,000,000 - Property purchased in controversial deal by MacDonnell-owned company named Bowood for
$550,000.

Former Military Base - Again MacDonnell companies did study of possible uses of Park and recommended a sound stage. MacDonnell group then got contract to build it with significant cost overruns, I am told. Base purchased by two Americans in controversial deal to acquire land and buildings with estimated replacement cost of $25,000,000 for $2,750,000 with SWSDA holding $1,750,000 mortgage with no mortgage payements for first three years. New owners have tried use as entertainment venue and opened a number of businesses including drive in movie, hotel, grocery store, candle-making operation, mini-putt, weekly newspaper,and have been trying to sell fencing and coastal lots. Understand most staff laid off last fall and businesses dormant.

Conclusion - Net benefits Boys School about same as Digby Wharf. Net Benefits so far at both properties, presumably property taxes to the Municipality of Shelburne.

Boys School Expenses and Sale Questions

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

Guess What You Paid For!

Sometimes a review of events after the fact provides a clearer perspective on matters. That is why representatives of the public have an ongoing responsibility to read documentation and ask questions. A good example of this is the following information that may not have been EASILY available at the time that events occurred, but did become available over the next nine months.

Point 1. Attachments to an affidavit submitted in November 2007 by SWSDA's CEO, include a list of expenses purportedly incurred by SWSDA in the marketing and maintenance of the Boys School. (This affidavit was made available to each of the lawyers for the Team Shelburne-represented municipalties and therefore would have been accessible to all members of Team Shelburne had they asked for it or sought to review it.) One of many items stands out seeking an explanation.

Payment 03/12/07 MacDonnell Group $13,829.74

Point 2. You may recall that a Proposal Call for the purchase of the Boys School was published in February 2007 for the 21 fully-serviced buildings PLUS over 200 acres adjacent to the Industrial Park in the Municipality of Shelburne. The closing date was March 9, 2007 and all proposals had to be received at the SWSDA office in Shelburne to be considered.

We now know that only one proposal was LEGALLY submitted to the SWSDA office in Shelburne by the designated time and date. That proposal was submitted by Bernie Dockrill.

We also now know that a proposal was illegally picked up in Halifax by the CEO of SWSDA from a Lawyer's Office sometime in March. We were told at the time by Mr. Anderson that the lawyer who submitted the proposal represented a numbered company.

In fact, we now know that in March 2007 the company did not exist. Indeed, the Registry of Joint Stocks record shows that the company the lawyer purportedly was representing was not incorporated (Bowood) until three months later (June 8, 2007)by Ralston Macdonnell. By that time Mr. Dockrill's bid had been rejected and the phantom company's proposal had been accepted by SWSDA.

Question As a taxpayer, I would like answers to the following questions.

a) Who authorized Mr. Anderson to illegally pick up a bid in contravention of the published bidding procedure?

b) Did Team Shelburne know that the bid submitted surreptitiously by Mr. MacDonnell through a lawyer using a non-existent company had not followed the proposal call procedures as stipulated in the published proposal call?

c) Did any Team Shelburne members (particularly the Warden of the Municipalty of Shelburne at the time, Paulette Scott) or the SWSDA Board know Mr. MacDonnell was behind the proposal picked up in Halifax by Mr. Anderson?

d) Why was the MacDonnell Group paid $13,829.74 out of the Boys School Maintenance Fund three days after the closing of proposals for the purchase the Boys School?

If you'd like answers to these questions, contact your local Town or Municipal Office, SWSDA or MLA. Alternatively, you can post comments, questions or your views at the bottom of this blog.

More about this property deal and the Maintenance Fund coming too.....