SWSDA Accountability to Public

The End is Here ...

2010-03-31T19:19:00.000-03:00

NO LONGER AN RDA

In four hours and forty-three minutes SWSDA will cease to exist as an RDA ... and cease collecting funding support from municipal, provincial and federal governments for its core funding and Mr. Anderson's salary. On the dole for fifteen years, the only question left is will SWSDA fade into the night with a whimper or a bang.....

Now that the walls of this dysfunctional rogue organization have been breeched, all that remains to be seen is whether politicians and civil servants have gotten the message and whether they will give themselves and taxpayers a chance at a fresh start .... by relaunching socio-economic development that is truly community-based, open, transparent and accountable..... under the aegis of accountable people and bodies.

I firmly believe that ..... ANYTHING LESS is doomed to failure and will perpetuate the misery generated by the present management and power base of the organization.

I will leave this site up in case anyone needs to refresh their memory of the things that were wrong with SWSDA.... However, it is not my intention to post anything additional to this site. The purpose of this posting and related activities has been achieved as evidenced by.... the following.

1. The Supreme Court has stated clearly that RDA's are public bodies and their files are to be open to the public under the Freedom of Information act. Mr. Anderson told his Board on more than one occassion that he would not lose that battle... he did.

2. The Ombudsman has issued a scathing report and I understand is pursuing further investigations of SWSDA and initiating new ones as requested by the Municipality of Barrington. Mr. Anderson has apparently not been very cooperative with the Ombudsman... that's a battle he will lose.

3. The Department of Economic Development is shutting down SWSDA as an RDA by requiring all RDA's to fall under the RDA Act. Mr. Anderson and his Yarmouth gang thought they could jsut play a shell game again and maintain the status quo .... The Province has not minced words with SWSDA or Mr. Anderson. ... Change has arrived.

4. The municipalities of Shelburne County are now struggling to regain control of their own socio-economic development agenda and asserting their rights ... and building solid relationships with Provincial and Federal agencies at the same time.... something Mr. Annderson had heretofore convinced them they couldn't do on their own.

GIVES ONE A WARM GLOWING FEELING THAT CITIZENS CAN STILL BRING ABOUT CHANGE.... GREAT FEELING!!

And..... remember my faithful readers that the Ombudsman's investigators found much about SWSDA's operations that were of sufficient concern to ask the Province to dramatically alter the legislation respecting RDA's, their accountability and their management.

REMEMBER ... the Ombudsman has asked both SWSDA and the Province to agree to three new audits and recommended four additional investigations of SWSDA's dealings... IN ADDITION, the Ombudsman (a former Assistant Superintendent of the RCMP) referred the sale of the Boys School (another SWSDA project that ended in such a blinding success NOT) to the RCMP. Hopefully, one or more of the audits requested by the Ombudsman will generate the additional evidence needed by the RCMP to proceed.

FINALLY ... we haven't seen the last of the Boys School money issue!!! That's because the Ombudsman found that neither Mr. Anderson nor his hand-picked SWSDA Executive had ANY authority to spend maintenance funds or proceeds of the sale without the approval of Team Shelburne ..... !! Moreover, the Ombudsman has directed that those funds be returned by SWSDA to Team Shelburne!

AND

SWSDA (read Frank Anderson) has refused to return the hundreds of thousands of dollars owed to the taxpayers of Shelburne County. One would hope that steps will be taken to return that money to its rightful owners .... Shelburne County residents.

Remember, you can search the archives ot take a look at documents or Mr. Anderson's expenses simply by doing elective searches or going back into the archives.

Thank you for reading my blog.

UPDATE ON BLOG

2010-01-13T10:13:00.000-04:00

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

What's Going On?

Over the holidays, I've been busy getting ready for our litigation with SWSDA. Hence, no blogs from us....

Trial was scheduled nearly two years ago to start January 18, 2010.

Monday this week, SWSDA's lawyers asked for a one week adjournment of the trial. We agreed to SWSDA's request but indicated that we would oppose any futher delays to this lawsuit initiated by Mr. Anderson in the name of SWSDA and its Board of Directors some ten years ago. Until the trial is underway or definitive dates for it to start are available, I do not plan to re-start my blogs.

In the interim Dear Reader I urge you to follow the development efforts and successes of the Municipality of Shelburne and Timothy Gillespie's site at http://www.shelburnecountytoday.com/ for news about SWSDA, the trial and development in our communities.

FYI - I have been advised by the Ombudsman's Office that at the request of SWSDA the Ombudsman's office also has extended the time for SWSDA to respond to the Ombudsman's report to this coming Friday, the 15th of January. I am told that by the end of January or first week in February, Willa Magee, Timothy Gillespie and I should receive our copy of the report. I will of course ensure we share the report with you as soon as we get a copy.

That's all the news for now folks.....!

BASE FOR SALE AGAIN?!?

2009-12-17T03:42:00.002-04:00

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

"OWNER RETIRING"

http://cgi.ebay.com/World-class-TV-and-Film-Production-Complex_W0QQitemZ320460322459QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item4a9cec769b

Second Property For Sale Too?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Amazing-Priced-to-Sell-Nova-Scotia-ocean-front-land_W0QQitemZ320461100523QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLand?hash=item4a9cf855eb

OMBUDSMAN'S PETITION

2009-12-16T02:39:00.000-04:00

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

FROM CONCERNED CITIZENS

Dear Reader.... It's now been a few years, but here's the letter to the Ombudsman that started all this...... A simple reading of this document will let you know what to expect in the report when it is released to "Concerned Citizens" in the coming weeks. How our municipal governments deal with their preview will provide telling testimony about the lessons they've learned... if any.... from the exercise!

Sent by fax to : 902-424-6675
May 27, 2007

Mr. Dwight Bishop
Ombudsman, Province of Nova Scotia
5670 Spring Garden Road
Suite 700
P.O. Box 2152
Halifax, NS B3J 3B7

Subject: Complaint Against Department of Economic Development, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Affairs, the South West Shore Development Authority (SWSDA) and its Nine Municipal Members

Dear Mr. Bishop:
We the undersigned believe that the Department of Economic Development, the nine
municipal governments who sit on SWSDA’s Board and the Department of Municipal
Affairs wittingly and illegally/irregularly permitted SWSDA to operate as an RDA under the Societies Act.

As a result, over the past 12 years many of the safeguards intended and built into the RDA Act have been skirted by SWSDA with significant deleterious financial and development effects on the taxpayers in the Municipality of Shelburne in particular and all of southwestern Nova Scotia in general. In large measure these lost financial and developmental opportunities were possible because this “arrangement” was blessed by government agencies prompting the further erosion of the principal of public accountability and the resulting loss of public control over a public institution.

The South West Shore Development Authority (SWSDA) is incorporated and has operated for some twelve years under the Societies Act rather than the Regional Community Development Act. Operating in this manner has permitted SWSDA, the Department of Economic Development, the Department of Municipal Affairs and the nine Municipal members of SWSDA to circumvent and contravene the provisions, and ignore the safeguards as well as the requirements of the Regional Community Development Act, resulting in the following:

a. RDAs should be incorporated under the appropriate Act - SWSDA is not;
b. the majority of RDA voting Board members should not be municipal representatives - the majority of SWSDA’s Board are municipal representatives (despite this situation, SWSDA claims not to be a municipal body or subject to the MGA);
c. RDA’s are not allowed to own land – SWSDA has been given and owns two major properties, has received mortgage financing from the Department of Economic Development on one of its properties and was recently given property for $1 by Order in Council and $600,000 to maintain it;
d. SWSDA has paid no property transfer tax on either of the properties it has acquired in the Municipality of Shelburne, and while it pays property tax on only one of the two properties it owns, the property tax paid by SWSDA on that one property is returned to SWSDA as a grant each year by the municipality;
e. although municipal governments are not allowed to provide loan guarantees to others, SWSDA has received frequent loan guarantees from all of its municipal members in the past and is now seeking additional guarantees thereby increasing the vulnerability of municipalities;
f. SWSDA’s ownership and management of these properties has resulted in a growing operating deficit of more than $1.5 million as of March 2007;
g. with respect to public accountability, SWSDA operates as a private society requiring Board and staff to sign confidentiality agreements and providing program/project financial reporting in a manner that makes it impossible to determine funding or expenses for any particular project;
h. while core funding reporting provides some details these are also commingled in the chart of accounts in such a manner as to make it impossible to determine the effectiveness, efficiency or economy of use of those resources – SWSDA further maintains that it is not subject to the MGA or FOIPOP, notwithstanding that it receives in excess of 99% of its funding from government, thereby making it difficult to assess audit information provided;
i. since the mid-90s taxpayers in the Municipality of Shelburne have borne the burden of the direct and indirect subsidies to SWSDA by providing grants in return for taxes, providing loans, providing loan guarantees and providing core funding;
j. now SWSDA is proposing that these same taxpayers bail SWSDA out of its deficit to help it out of its insolvency .

The Regional Community Development Act. 1996, c. 29, s. 1. at paragraph 6 provides
the Minister of Economic Development with the authority to establish, by order,
corporate bodies to be regional community development agencies.

Under the definitions section of the Act, it goes further by providing the following definition for Regional Development Agencies incorporated under the Regional Communities Development Act:

3 In this Act,
(a) "agency" means a regional community development organization established pursuant to this Act;

It is important to note that the use of the Societies Act to incorporate certain groups under the Societies Act is purposely restricted and specifically excludes the incorporation of RDAs under the Societies Act. Specifically, paragraph 3. (2) of the Societies Act. R.S., c. 435, s.1 states that:

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.

Questions

1. Given the provisions for incorporation under the Regional Communities Development Act and the clear restriction in the Society’s Act, is SWSDA entitled to legally be incorporated as a Society?

2. If it is entitled to be incorporated as a Society, is it entitled to call itself a Regional Development Agency (RDA) given the strictures on the use of that term in the Regional Communities Development Act?

3. If it is entitled to be incorporated as a Society under the Societies Act, is it entitled to the funding earmarked and approved for the use of RDAs that is provided under the Community Economic Development Program of the Canada/Nova Scotia COOPERATION Agreement on Economic Diversification.

4. If it is entitled to be incorporated as a Society under the Societies Act, is the SWSDA a municipal body as defined in the MGA?

5. If it is a municipal body, what obligations does SWSDA have respecting the conduct of its annual audit and its chart of accounts?

6. If it is a municipal body, what are the Auditor General’s responsibilities respecting SWSDA’s operations?

7. If it is not a municipal body and it is not an RDA, do taxpayers have any obligation to

provide SWSDA with any financial support?

8. If it is an RDA, how did it become an RDA given the detailed process for the creation and formulation of RDAs found in the Regional Communities Development Act?

9. If SWSDA is an RDA do the strictures related to RDAs found in the Act, provincial guidelines, regulations and official government web sites apply to SWSDA?

10. If they do not, why don’t they?

11. If they do, who is responsible for ensuring that provincial requirements for SWSDA as an RDA are enforced?

12. If SWSDA is an RDA and RDAs are not allowed to own land, should the two properties that were transferred in error to SWSDA by government be returned to the Province and/or the Federal Government?

13. If not, why not.

14. If SWSDA is prohibited from being a Society under the Societies Act and it was never incorporated as an RDA under the Rural Communities Development Act, does it have any legitimate legal status?

As taxpayers, we grow increasingly concerned by the failures of Provincial and Municipal officials to properly manage this portfolio. Their failure to do so has further thrust additional taxes on our communities over the past twelve years and now has created a financial crisis with significant property tax implications in our communities. Your kind assistance would be appreciated. If we can provide additional information please let us know.

Yours very truly,

A. A. Cayer

Timothy Gillespie

Willa Magee

HISTORIC MEETING - INSIDE SCOOP!

2009-12-13T05:08:00.001-04:00

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

DEPUTY MINISTER MEETS SWSDA BOARD

On Friday the 11th of December the Deputy Minister met with the Mayors and Wardens from three counties who are responsible for the sound administration of the South West Shore Development Authority. As previously reported, the meeting was to discuss the SWSDA request for $500,000 additional loan guarantee backed by govt. The bail-out is needed because SWSDA is apparently on the brink of bankruptcy. Just before the meeting all voting SWSDA board members received a copy of the long-anticipated Ombudsman's Report, which will certainly be very critical of SWSDA operating and governance practices.

WHAT WAS LIKELY DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING AND SOME POSSIBLE CONCLUSIONS

..... the Province is still unwilling to back the $500,000 with the information they have at hand. Govt sources in Halifax say that requests from the govt for more information have gone unheeded.

..... The Ombudsman's report was likely thorough and almost cerainly responded in detail to the questions asked by Concerned Citizens 30 months ago (see copy here) and the SWSDA board has until January 8th (25 days and counting) to make comments on the report.

.... it is no secret that Board Governance... or should I say a lack of sound Governance by the SWSDA Board members - is a major problem.

WANT TO KNOW MORE?

Ask your Mayor, Warden or Board Member.... they are the ones responsible for fixing the mal-administration of this essential development agency in our midst....Municipal, Provincial and Federal Governments endow them with trust, information and millions of taxpayer dollars each year. The Ombudsman has concluded that management of the organziation needs change...... Find out what our municipal representatives on the Board intend to do about it.... ASK THEM... call, write or stop them on the street.... but ask if you want them to know you are concerned and you care!

2009-12-10T19:25:00.001-04:00

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

SWSDA PROJECT REPORT

When SWSDA talks about all the projects they have organized and are running for us, do you know what they are talking about? Well you should.

They account for millions of dollars each year being spent in the name of development for our communities. Take a look at the latest project report for SWSDA and tell me what you see.

For example, does anyone know why the C@P summer students for 2008 are listed on this 2009/2010 report?

Does anyone know.... what the Community Access Society does, why their budget for this year is $55,000 and why they've spent 50% mmore than the entire year's budget after only six months?

And, why C@P projects .... are listed under Business & Investment services?

And do you realize dear reader .... that if you remove the C@P expenses from this category that SWSDA's total Business & Investment portfolio projects for nine municipalities in three counties is less than $80,000!

Oh.... and I haven't begun to ask questions about this Shelburne SoundStage/Park project with a budget of $75,000, no funding identified and no explanation!

SWSDA & The Role of Municipalities

2009-12-10T14:35:00.000-04:00

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

MAKING THE RDA ACCOUNTABLE

The Right Honourable Justice Hood in Her Decision about SWSDA says....

"I conclude that SWSDA is 'under the authority of' the participating municipalities."

For some time now I have argued that municipal councils had a special responsibility to monitor, direct and control SWSDA through the representatives of the Municipality that they appointed to the SWSDA Board.

Let me suggest to you that municipalities have failed in this essential duty of sound governance.

Further.... let me suggest to you that after all of its investigative work, the Ombudsman's office will agree.!

In part, I believe that this failure is caused by ..... the manner in which Board members have been misled into believing that certain information about the inner workings of SWSDA was best kept away from elected municipal councils. I recall Pat Nickerson, Paulette Scott and Raymond Davis claiming that they couldn't share information about SWSDA Board meetings because "they were confidential."

As a result, I believe the pattern shows that:

- the CEO kept secrets from the Board,

- the Executive of SWSDA kept secrets from the full members of SWSDA,

- the Board members and Mr. Anderson kept information secret from Municipal Councils.....

Resulting in .... the public being kept in the dark and decisions being made on behalf of the municipalities and taxpayers without input from elected officials who are responsible and asked to be accountable to the public.

All this dear Reader to suggest that when municipal representatives get a copy of the the Consultative Report from the Ombudsman's Office, they should ensure that their Councils are consulted about its content before the SWSDA Board and municipal representatives on the Board respond to the Ombudsman.... which I understand they have to do before January 6, 2010.

What do you think?

CAN YOU SPELL EMBARGO?

2009-12-10T05:04:00.002-04:00

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

OMBUDSMAN'S REPORT & FINDINGS

SUBMITTED TO GOVERNMENT AND

SWSDA BOARD MEMBERS

Department of Economic and Rural Development and SWSDA Board have 30 days from receipt of the Ombudsman's report to respond before the public will get to see the report.

Want to understand the process? Take a look at the Act.....

http://shelburnecitizendrivendevelopment.blogspot.com/2009/12/ombudsman-act.html

SWSDA Financials as at September 30

2009-12-09T20:52:00.003-04:00

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

WHERE'D THE MONEY GO!?!

Ever wonder? Here's SWSDA's Balance Sheet for the first six months of this fiscal year.... to the end of September. Click on it to enlarge....

A quick look shows that SWSDA has some three-quarters of a million dollars in cash and term deposits, $868,333 in receivables (presumably from governments) and a mortgage payable in monthly installments to SWSDA by Sea Coast Entertainment beginning in 5 or 6 months.... Mortgage principle is worth $1,750,000. plus interest to SWSDA..... Along with odds and sods .... total assets of more than $3,405,000.00

Not bad for an organization that keeps complaining about being broke..... but here's the rub!

Accounts payable jumped some $300,000 in just one month to $901, 767.05 .... for what you ask.... ? ? Good Question!

When added to other project accruals.... for this year, Total Project Accruals are more than $1,500,000! Add Demand loans, repayable grants, the Sound Stage Loan guaranteed by the Municipality of Shelburne, amounts owing to the Province of $475,000 from a mortgage on the Base sold by SWSDA in 2008, money owing to Shelburne County Business Development Centre and an item entitled "Deferred Capital Contributions" and total Liabilities are significant having risen more than$70,000 in September alone.....

Gotta love high finance as practiced by "Former Bankers"..... Hate to think what kind of shape Yarmouth Area Industrial Commission is in!!

Abra Kadabra - Its Just a Book Entry!

2009-12-08T21:03:00.000-04:00

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

Today's Financial News

Today we are told by ACOA that Core Operational Funding for 2009-2012 has been approved for SWSDA. Here are the numbers... are you sitting down?!?

ACOA Funding $489,047.00

Total Project Cost $2,370,000.00

Does enyone know what that means?

If you do, send us a note, provide a comment...

I note in the same announcement that the

Guysborough RDA's funding is in the same ball park...

and they only cover one county with 9,000 people!

And then there is all this talk about how SWSDA needs more liquidity for bridge financing of the projects it manages for us all....

I don't know... but.... when I look at their latest financial report for projects here are the numbers I see....

Total Project Revenues to September 30, 2009

$1,482,498.00

Total Project Expenses to September 30, 2009

$990,068.00

Gee.... am I missing something?

Are project revenues really $492,430 more than Expenses?

So why does SWSDA need a Guarantee from the Province of $500,000?

Certainly not project financing.....??

DO YOU THINK?

Interesting Comments

2009-12-01T08:31:00.001-04:00

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

Thank you dear readers for your comments and sharing your thoughts on this stuff. On subject and within legal limits.... great. I understand that Timothy will share his views on some of these comments on his site SCT .... take a look later.

Ed

SWSDA Mid-Year Review

2009-11-30T10:55:00.000-04:00

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

VISIT THE YARMOUTH TOWN WEB SITE FOR A COPY

OF SWSDA'S MID-YEAR REVIEW

AND BUDGET

http://townofyarmouth.ca/agenda/files2/00200/231/swsda_2009_2010_mid_year_review.pdf

It makes for interesting reading dear reader. I invite you to share your views with others about the report.

ABOUT OUR 13 RDAs

2009-11-29T02:55:00.000-04:00

Talk a Walk on the Wild Side

and Visit our RDA sites....

Annapolis Digby Economic Development Agency

Web: http://www.annapolisdigby.com/

Antigonish Regional Development Authority
Web: http://www.antigonishrda.ns.ca/

Cape Breton County Economic Development Authority

Web: http://www.cbceda.org/

Colchester Regional Development Agency
Web: http://www.corda.ca/

Cumberland Regional Economic Development Association
Web: http://www.creda.net/

Greater Halifax Partnership

Web: http://www.greaterhalifax.com/

Guysborough County Regional Development Authority

Web: http://www.gcrda.ns.ca/

Hants Regional Development Authority

Web: http://www.hantscounty.com/

Kings Regional Development Agency

Web: http://www.kingsrda.ca/

Lunenburg Queens Regional Development Agency

Web: http://www.lqrda.ns.ca/

Pictou Regional Development Commission

Web: http://www.prdc.com/

South West Shore Development Authority
Web: http://www.swsda.com/

YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME

2009-11-29T01:36:00.000-04:00

THANK YOU FOR SHARING

YOUR THOUGHTS

This blog is about making publicly funded organizations more accountable and documenting why they should be and when they aren't. Your comments are welcome and will be published as long as they are civil and focused on the issues relevant to the objective of this blog.

Contribution from Anonymous

2009-11-27T16:21:00.002-04:00

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

The Blame Game....

Moments ago one of my readers wrote a lengthy comment much of which had nothing to do with the issue of SWSDA Accountability..... which is what this blog is about.

However, I wanted to share with my readers Anon 3.53's thoughts of relevance to this blog.

Anon, your suggestion that I not rant "... as it will not serve you well." is interesting and I thank you for it.... It helps to put the rest of your comments in context. Anon 3:53 went on to suggest that Mr. Hardy might be excused from doing his job properly and obeying the law because "... he answers to the Mayor..." adding that blame should be put in its proper place and that I should "... not brow beat the innocent."

First let me deal with the substantive portion of Anon 3:53's comments that are relevant to this blog about SWSDA Accountability. First, I wrote about Mr. Hardy because it is exactly his kind of behaviour yesterday that in my view has permitted SWSDA to become a rogue organization over the past fourteen years.

As far as I know, Mr. Hardy is his own man, employed in a senior position of trust by the taxpayers and citizens of this community and paid reasonably well to do the job. He is hardly the "innocent" suggested by Anon 3.53... It is his decision alone to do or not do his job as the law requires him. No Employer can oblige you to do things that are wrong, or ignore or subvert the spirit and/or the intent of the law. No Employer.... and certainly no Mayor. What Mr. Hardy did yesterday was wrong. Plain and simple.... in my view.... and if his employer wants him to do things like that, Mr Hardy has a responsibility to advise his superior that the action he has been directed to take is wrong and he won't do it. May not be easy... but that would be the right decision and action to take.

As for Mayor Delaney, I don't even know if he is aware that this is being done in the name of the Town or how many hours a day he is actually spending in the office or working on Town affairs given his state of health. No dear Anon 3:53.... can't buy your argment ... but thank you for providing another perspective!

Two Sides to Every Coin

2009-11-26T21:30:00.000-04:00

REPLY TO ANON 6:49

Dear Anon 6:49..... The arguments you pose for withholding information from the public, contrary to the intent of the Freedom of Information Act have been used to abuse the system before.

1. I believe that if correspondence has been sent to any municipality for a decision of council, it should be forwarded to councillors immediately.... not hoarded by theMayor/Warden and the Clerk/CAO until the next meeting of council.

2. If councillors are sent correspondence received by the municipality, when it is received, public access to these documents should be ensured as stipulated in the Municipal Government Act.

Otherwise, how can they consult with taxpayers and voters before reaching a decision about a subject that did not come up in the last election..... do they really need more time than the average citizen to digest the document... and do they have to come to a conclusion about it before they've consulted the great unwashed masses and before they meet and hear the views of other members of council?

The purpose of this legislation is to provide an opportunity for informed public participation in the management of our communities. Any actions in my view that subvert that intention as spelled out in the Municipal Government Act is wrong.....

In my humble opinion... I would like to think that Brian Holland and Kirk Cox would make the document available to the public if asked .... however, since I live in the Town and my taxes pay a part of Mr. Hardy's salary I would have hoped that he would have done the honourable thing by a local taxpayer... he didn't!

No.... dear Anon 6:49... you're entitled to your views..... but... I don't buy your logic.

OBSTRUCTION ... YOUR NAME IS FAILURE!

2009-11-26T21:04:00.001-04:00

THE TIMES THEY ARE A CHANGING!

Well dear reader.... my faith in the good guys winning has been renewed .... after my rampage this afternoon about what I viewed as Wilmont Hardy's efforts to subvert my rights and ignore his legal and moral obligations respecting access to public documents I embarked on a plan to rectify the situation....

It wasn't long before I received a copy of the very letter Wilmont had decided to deprive me of ..... from another source in the leaky SWDSA support boat ... abusing citizens' rights to access to information and informed participation.

First.... let me thank the ethical Board or staff member of SWSDA who leaked the document.

Second.... let me share with you why getting this document before the December 1st meeting of municipal politicians is so critical.

You probably do not know that many of our Councillors have not been provided with a copy of the letter in question. To my knowledge, no Council in Shelburne County has as yet had a fullsome, informed discussion about the letter or detemined what action if any they might take in response to Mr. Anderson's demands.

YET .... next Tuesday they are scheduled to come together to discuss what to do about creating a new RDA...NOW I ASK YOU.... WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE!?!

Come on Mayors, Wardens CAOs and Clerks.... make copies of this letter and let's get it on a public agenda for discussion as quickly as possible....... so we can have an informed public discussion about this important issue that may shape public dialogue and action respecting socio-economic development here at home for a number of years to come. Public input muight even prove beneficial in guiding your decision-making

LET US FINALLY CUT OUT THE MALEVOLENT SECRECY THAT HAS PLAGUED OUR COMMUNITIES FOR FAR TOO LONG....!!

ps... Tomorrow I'll publish the letter that Wilmont Hardy refused to give me today..... gotta love the sweet irony ..... with thanks to our sources..... I now prepare for my nightly retirement with a clear conscience and a renewed faith in the inherent goodness of human kind!

!!! OBSTRUCTION !!!

2009-11-26T10:22:00.000-04:00

YOUR NAME IS WILMONT HARDY

Next Tuesday, elected officials in Shelburne County will meet to begin discussions about the future RDA that will service municipalities and communities in Shelburne County. When they do, I am told, they will do so facing a letter from Mr. Anderson of SWSDA fame, demanding that each municipality pledge their future alliance and allegiance to SWSDA as each municipality's choice of RDA for the future. They have been told by Mr. Anderson that they have until December 11 to do so.

Now..... I am reporting this information third hand or fourth hand because I haven't seen the letter from Mr. Anderson. It would be nice to have a copy so that I can share it with my dear readers and communicate my views on the subject to those elected officials whose salaries I pay - before they meet December 1st. However, I am told by Mr. Hardy our erstwhile Town Clerk that I must wait until the day after the December 1 meeting of elected officials, "because Council has not yet reviewed the letter."

As I explained to Mr. Hardy, the law is clear. The public has a right to see or have a copy of any letter in the possession of the Municipality, when it receives the letter. Of course, there are limited exceptions for withholding documents, however this document doesn't fall into any excluded category.

However, to provide municipalities with the necessary time to determine if documents should be withheld, the law provides municipalities with up to 30 days to respond to a request for information. The use of this clause by Mr. Hardy to withold this document until some later date (he said I could have it after the Council meeting on December 2nd) is wrong and contrary to the intent of the law. Further, it is a clear, unadulterated abuse of a position of trust given to those like Mr. Hardy who are entrusted with the responsibility to apply the law correctly and justly.

Of course, I shouldn't be surprised at Mr. Hardy's disregard for his responsibilities to the citizens he is paid to serve. He is the same fella who has the temerity to charge $0.50 a page for copies of documents provided by the Town of Shelburne, when the law clearly states that municipalities are only allowed to charge the actual cost of making a copy. When I pointed that out to Mr. Hardy some time ago he smiled and said that was not the way he interpreted the law.

LITTLE WONDER CITIZENS FEEL DISENFRANCHISED

SWSDA Finances September 30, 2009

2009-11-23T16:46:00.001-04:00

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

Highlights From SWSDA's

Latest Comparative Balance Sheet

At at 9/30/2009 and 8/31/2009

Total Accounts Receivable

9/30/2009 ... $887,333.61

8/31/2009 ... $906,921.66

Total Current Assets

9/30/2009 ... $3,405,285.46

8/31/2009 ... $3,398,018.48

Accounts Payable

9/30/2009 ... $901,767.05

8/31/2009 ... $604,589.42

Total Liabilities

9/30/2009 ... $3,792,160.18

8/31/2009 ... $3,718,895.88

SWSDA Project Report Shelburne County

September 30, 2009

Shelburne Sound Stage

Budget ..... $75,000.00

Expenses...$27,768.00

Shelburne Tourism

Budget ..... $140,000.00

Expenses ..$13,588.00

Shelburne JCP

Budget ..... $ 48,500.00

Expenses ...$21,527.00

Does anyone know what the Shelburne Sound Stage Project is and who is paying for it?

CONCERNED CITIZENS RDA MEETING

2009-11-20T08:18:00.000-04:00

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

PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS OFF TO A GOOD START

Last night's public meeting drew a crowd of more than 60 interested Shelburne County Citizens including a good cross-section of citizens, business leaders and politicians from across the county. Will write more over the weekend.... prior commitments today.

Follow-up on this story will be posted to the http://www.shelburnedevelopment.blogspot.com/ site.

And of course for the news angle on this story go to Timothy Gillespie's site http://www.shelburnecountytoday.com/

Six More Days to Vote!

2009-11-11T02:28:00.000-04:00

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

88% WANT PUBLIC INPUT!!

Today's new survey question generates near unanimity amongst voters for public input in defining the new RDA.

Have you voted? Only six more days left to record your views and respond to the survey.

Check it out ... just to the left of this posting.

New Survey Question

2009-11-09T00:48:00.000-04:00

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

Have you taken a moment to express your views on our new survey question?

Answers About SPDA

2009-11-09T00:22:00.000-04:00

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

The Shelburne Park Development Agency (SPDA)

Dear Reader,

In the mid-90s the Federal Government was eager to dispose of many of their former naval bases in Nova Scotia. They did so by encouraging the establishment of local non-profit groups to administer dollars set aside for transforming these former military facilities into local development sites. Monies set aside for this purpose were funneled through ACOA and was administered by these local groups.

In the case of the former Shelburne Naval Station, I am told some $5 million dollars plus the old base at the entrance to Shelburne Harbour was handed to SPDA's Board of Directors. In 1999, SPDA transfered all of its assets to SWSDA and ceased to exist.

In the coming months a lot of information will become available at trial about SPDA and SWSDA's management of these assets and local development efforts. Believe me.... I could write a book.

Until then, I am not at liberty to share that information with readers since most of it was acquired as part of the discovery process in Ocean Produce International's litigation with SWSDA. As it is disclosed at trial I will publish further details that I've unearthed about SPDA/SWSDA's use of these resources.

For the reader who keeps asking for details about SPDA .... I guess you'll just have to wait along with everyone else. Your only alternative is to bypass this blog and go directly to the horse's mouth and make application to ACOA or SWSDA under Freedom of Information for the information you are seeking. They are the only two bodies I know of who hold these original files and managed these monies and resources. ... Sorry I can't be more helpful.

Dear Anonymous 5:04

2009-11-08T19:24:00.000-04:00

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

Can't publish your comments with the word "illegal" in them. Remove word and re-submit if you want me to post.

Still Pushing on the Rope!

2009-11-08T16:00:00.000-04:00

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

NERVE... WITH A CAPITAL N!!

You will recall that in August, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations' Mr. Wills pointed out to Mr. Anderson that as an RDA SWSDA was not allowed to own land and as a Municipal Body its financing had to be approved by the Minister and provided under the Municipal Finance Act.

Here is Mr. Anderson's reply.... it speaks volumes about Mr. Anderson's and his ability to twist facts to accommodate his view of the world. The legislation is clear as is Justice Hood's decision of last November. Any body, including a Society whose Board is effectively controlled by representatives of Municipal Governments is a "Municipal Body" by definition and subject to the Freedom of Information provisions of the Municipal Government Act.

Try as he might... you can't change what you've been in the past.... if it looks like a duck, mates with a duck, flies like a duck, sheds duck feathers and eats from the ducks' dish... it is considered a duck.......

Of course Mr. Anderson indicates that SWSDA's well paid lawyers don't agree!!

Surprise... Surprise...! Mr. Anderson also assured his Board of Directors for more than two years that SWSDA's lawyers said that SWSDA was not subject to the Freedom of Information provisions of the Municipal Government Act....

Guess they were wrong then.... wonder if they're wrong again?!?

More later!!!

Getting SWSDA Accountability Going Again

2009-11-08T15:07:00.001-04:00

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

Dear Readers,

As you may or may not know ..... I recently started a business and economic development consulting company here in Shelburne called Strategic Perspectives Consulting Associates and its been busy since last January.

In addition .... I am a Director and agent for a Nova Scotia company called International Resource Development Corporation with its office here in Shelburne and its headquarters in Montreal. Last January the President of IRDC and I put together an international consortium with companies in England, Denmark and Holland and bid on a major standing offer contract with the government of Canada ..... we've just been advised that we were successful and been selected to sign a multi-year contract with the Canadian International Development Agency. This morning I finished the draft operational contract for our consortium and its now on its way to our partners. We expect work under the contract to start early in the new year.

And... I am President of an internet radio station in Alberta that my son Kirk and his wife now operate as Leduc County's Home Radio Station...you can listen at http://www.leducradio.com/ . Last week we celebrated our first year of operation.

Finally.... Ocean Produce International is in the last stages of preperation for our lawsuit against SWSDA. This litigation has been going on for ten years and trial is scheduled to begin January 18th, 2010 for four weeks in Halifax. As you can imagine Willa and I've been intimately involved on a daily basis with trial preperation and will be for the next few months.

All this to explain why I haven't been posting as much as some of you would like!! I promise to make an effort to post at least once a week until we get to trial... but I expect posts will be short. ... Your patience in the interim is greatly appreciated.

Ed

Listen to Lawyer's Presentation

2009-10-15T13:02:00.001-03:00

On Tuesday the 13th of October I attended a meeting of the Municipality of Barrington's Council meeting and I recorded the following parts of that meeting.

1. Presentation by Attorney C. Nickerson on the Municipal Government Act, SWSDA and YAIC (5m)

2. Intervention from the audience. (800kb)

3. Council consideration of a request from SWSDA for a comfort and support letter to Minister Paris for a loan guarantee of $500,000 and disposal of the $1.75 million mortgage SWSDA now holds on the former Shelburne Naval Base. (2.5 m)

Note to readers. So here's the problem!!!

I make use of Google's free blog technology because it is relatively simple to use. However, simplicity imposes limits on what you can do with the technology. One of the things I haven't figured out is how to put tape recordings on my blogs.

Sooo.... I am reduced to the following offer. Go to Timothy's Web page or click on the following address...
http://www.shelburnecountytoday.com/docs/nickerson.mp3 to listen to the first of these recordings.

Alternatively..... If you are interested in receiving a copy of any or all of these recordings please send me a note telling me which one or ones you want to copy for your files at aacayer@gmail.com and I will forward a copy to you.

SWSDA Audited Financial Statement 2008/2009

2009-10-12T12:15:00.003-03:00

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

JUST FOR YOU DEAR READER

Following is the subject statement. My comments to follow in the coming days. (You may have to print them to truly be able to understand them.)

SWSDA Minutes

2009-10-12T11:37:00.000-03:00

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

SWSDA's Minutes from their June 17, 2009 meeting recently appeared on their web site at www.swsda.com/index.php?=know

Lots of in camera stuff and lots of items where you have to read between the lines.... Take a look.

Hard to believe ... that SWSDA is a "municipal body" .... or a real RDA working for the benefit of its member municipalities, accountable to taxpayers who are paying the freight.

NO TAXPAYER GUARANTEES FOR SWSDA DEBT

2009-10-11T11:34:00.001-03:00

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

MUNICIPAL SERVICES & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

GET IT RIGHT!

For a number of years, SWSDA has supplemented contributions to SWSDA's core funding in creative ways. In addition to core funding grants, municipalities have fronted SWSDA expenditures with line of credit guarantees exceeding $500,000 per year. They have also contributed additional grants to SWSDA funding initiatives and guaranteed loans provided to SWSDA by the Royal Bank for specific projects. Recently, SWSDA tried again to pry its fingers into municipal pockets by seeking to get municipalities to increase their line of credit guarantees from $500,000 to $750,000. That plan back-fired when municipal watchdogs found out and pointed out to municipalities that it was illegal for municipalities to provide these guarantees.

SWSDA's fallback position was to convince municipalities to provide the extra $250,000 as "repayable grants", (which they did last year and that quarter of a million dollars is now listed as a payable on SWSDA's books). The new $250,000 in grants plus the existing $500,000 in guarantees now brought the total in additional cash provided to SWSDA to three-quarters of a million dollars. That $250,000 has now been spent by SWSDA and the most recent accounting indicates that the majority of the guarantee has been spent also.

This creative financing approach ... was sold by SWSDA as an interim step while SWSDA arranged to get the Province to change the law to enable municipalities to legally provide guarantees for RDAs. I wrote recently about that initiative when I provided you dear reader with a copy of a letter from Mr. Anderson to M. Wills who works for Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

In his letter ... copied by Mr. anderson to Mayors and Wardens in Yarmouth and Shelburne Counties and the Municipality of Clare, Mr. Anderson provided a purported response from the former Minister of Municipal Affairs implying that the government was working on a way to accomodate a resolution passed by the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities seeking a change in the legislation to permit these guarantees by municipalities.

Here is Mr. Wills reply to Mr. Anderson.... His reply is interesting for a couple of reasons. First, Mr. Wills raises the issue that if these guarantees are to be provided by municipalities SWSDA would have to be a "municipal body". Mr. Wills points out that if that happened, SWSDA would only be able to "...borrow from the Municipal Finance Corporation...." and its borrowings would be regulated by the Municipal Finance Corporation Act.

Moreover, Mr. Wills points out that borrowings of this type would only be provided for capital projects and would require Ministerial approval of each guarantee. He also points out that under the Regional Community Development Act, RDAs are not allowed to "... buy, sell and own property..." something Richard Hurlburt and the previous government failed to enforce. Indeed, successive Conservative governments turned a blind eye to the laws of the province thereby enabling the continuing flaunting of our laws by SWSDA and our municipalities.

What a pleasure... watching a government enforcing the laws we are supposed to live under. Gee... it might even give one confidence that some day we can sort out this mess! Thanks Mr. Wills and the Department of Economic Development.

SWSDA Comparative Accounts July 31, 2009

2009-10-04T11:55:00.002-03:00

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

SOME ... ANSWERS TO EARLIER FINANCIAL QUESTIONS

While this report doesn't answer all of the questions one might have about SWSDA's finances and in fact some of the information might be mis-leading.... it does open the door a smidge.... and actually raises other questions.

For example, the RBC Dominion Securities Investments I believe represent the monies SWSDA was forced to set aside in accordance with the Consent Order flowing from the Fraudulent Conveyance action on the Boys School brought by OPI in 1997 against SWSDA. What isn't clear is why monies that were supposed to have been deposited in a segregated interest bearing bank account or GIC have not accrued any interest since March 31, 2009 according to this statement. It is also unclear why SWSDA has set up an RBC Investment Cash Account with some of these monies from the Boys School in contravention of the requirements of the Consent Order. Also, it is unclear how come the item listing the Shelburne Boys School Accrual is different than the Investments referred to under Assets and why the amount has not changed between March 31, 2009 and July 31, 2009.

According to this statement it appears that taxpayers in our municipalities on July 31st this year were on the hook for some $375,000 ( $165,000) more than at March 31, 2009 through our guarantees of SWSDA's operating line. Add to that the $200,000 we taxpayers have provided in grants that are re-payable by SWSDA and the $84,105 guarantee provided by the Municipal taxpayers of Shelburne and used by SWSDA for the cost overun on the Sound Stage built under Mr. MacDonnell's corporate supervision and we can now see the tip of the iceberg of taxpayer indebtedness that we know about driven by SWSDA's activities.... and we haven't seen the Audited Financial Statements for last year yet .. even though the fiscal year is more than half over. Click on the statement below to enlarge.

THIS MORNING'S QUESTION ABOUT YOU AND SWSDA!

2009-09-30T03:47:00.000-03:00

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

Do you know how much of the line of credit used by SWSDA is outstanding today?

Do you know if SWSDA's account is overdrawn today... and if it is, do you know by how much?

Do you know that each of us as taxpayers have guaranteed and or financed SWSDA's overdraft and line of credit through our municipal participation on the Board of Directors of SWSDA?

Do you know that Mr Anderson alone can decide how much of that overdraft he uses at any given point in time without first getting approval from taxpayers or our representatives on the Board?

Do you know if your representative on the Board of SWSDA can tell you the status today of SWSDA's line of credit or overdraft obligations and our municipality's and by extension, your share of these accounts?

HALF THE FISCAL YEAR IS GONE!

2009-09-28T13:37:00.000-03:00

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

AND STILL

NO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

FROM SWSDA!

Let's see..... the end of the fiscal year is March 31, 2009..... and we are now six months into the fiscal year .... so why hasn't the SWSDA financial statement for 2008/2009 been filed with the registry of joint stocks?

I thought Mr. Anderson was an ex-banker and fully cognizant of all things financial..... I guess the emphasis should be on the "ex" part of ex-banker!

In the interim, an organization with significant financial problems is left to drift by our elected officials and municipal councils..... their corporate and personal fiduciary obligations ignored in the wake of an increasing chorus of voices asking questions and demanding audits.

QUESTION 1 !

WILL DIRECTORS' LIABILITY INSURANCE COVER MEMBERS OF BOARDS OF DIRECTORS WHO IGNORE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO MONITOR AND HOLD ACCOUNTABLE MEMBERS OF STAFF AND THE EXECUTIVE?!?

QUESTION 2 !

ARE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAILURE OF THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ON THE SWSDA BOARD TO EXERCISE THEIR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES?!?

QUESTION 3 !

ARE PROFESSIONALS LIKE ACCOUNTANTS AND LAWYERS BURDENED WITH A HIGHER LEVEL OF OBLIGATIONS FOR ENSURING THE FISCAL AND LEGAL CORRECTNESS OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THEY SERVE AS MEMBERS OF A BOARD OR EXECUTIVE?!?

ITS YOUR FAULT!

2009-09-09T21:42:00.000-03:00

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

NOW, DO YOU FEEL BETTER?

Who cares whose fault it is.... IMHO .... it is now time for us to turn the page, resolve not to make the same mistakes and find solutions that will work for us and our kids and grandkids....

"DISSIPATED: GOTTEN RID OF; WASTED, DISPERSED"

2009-09-03T01:06:00.000-03:00

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

SWSDA WORKING ON MORTGAGES ?

In November 2007 ... SWSDA's CEO submitted a sworn Affidavit to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. In the Affidavit he claimed that SWSDA had, between July and November 2007, "dissipated" more than a quarter of a million dollars that was left in the Maintenance Fund after the Boys School was sold in June as well as the $550,000 received from the sale.

As a result of this declaration by SWSDA .... the parties to the Fraudulent Conveyance case agreed that SWSDA was to replace the Boys School's "dissipated funds" (the unspent portion of the $625,000 Maintenance Fund + $550,000 + interest going back a number of years) by using the proceeds from the sale of the Former Naval Base when it was sold and the Court so ordered SWSDA to set aside these funds.

Fast forward more than a year later to March 2008 when the Base was sold....

It would appear... that SWSDA received less than a million in cash from the sale of the Base and $716,000 of that was set aside to satisfy the court order. In addition, SWSDA quickly moved $150,000 to pay off a loan held by the Yarmouth Area Industrial Commission. The RDA now holds a mortgage on the Base of $1.75 million which it has been trying to sell off at a discount to others including the Provincial Government so that it can get its hands on a more liquid form of asset.... cash! (Now Mr. Anderson's briefing of the SWSDA Board at their May meeting about SEACOAST and their prospects makes sense!!!)

Now we hear on the grapevine ... that even the disappearing government of Rodney MacDonald wouldn't bite that poison fruit in its final six months in power... but ever peristent Mr. Anderson .... we understand is pitching municipal members of his Board of Directors and the new provincial government to reconsider and take the mortgage off his hands and give him cash.

I guess holding a mortgage for $1.75 million whose terms provide for delayed payment is like having a gold credit card where you've exceeded both the total and daily credit limit.....is it burning a hole in Mr. Anderson's pocket? Seems that way!

Additions To Blog

2009-09-01T11:09:00.001-03:00

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

You may have noticed some additions to this blog today. On the left hand side of the blog there is now a clickable link to two other blogs (one is a new blog called Shelburne Development that I am launching today ) and Timothy Gillespie's ever- popular and recently resuscitated Shelburne County Today. Adding this makes it easier for readers to move from one to the other.

I have also added a survey question tool that you can monitor as folks vote.... should be interesting.

Hope you enjoy it.

Who's Counting!?!

2009-08-31T12:28:00.003-03:00

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

FYI......... As of midnight last night this blog, started in mid-May has logged 59,896 page views
and 10,551 visits.

I invite you to add your thoughts to mine and those of other readers by providing your comments or thoughts. This blog is about the issues surrounding RDA Accountability in the past and in the future. Our ability to be informed about the past and present is essential for us to prepare and enhance our ability to manage the future.

Please take a moment and share your thoughts with our readers.

Proposed RDA Workshop Discussion

2009-08-31T12:17:00.001-03:00

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

Dear Reader.... Please go to http://www.shelburnecitizendrivendevelopment.blogspot.com/ for this discussion....

ACCOUNTABILITY ... IN CAPITAL LETTERS!

2009-08-31T10:34:00.004-03:00

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

THREE MONTHS LATER

In the Minutes of the May 27 meeting ow SWSDA a number of questions were asked.... some reportedly answered and/or discussed by the Board with others to be answered later. Below is a list of those reportedly clarified, answered and/or discussed with Board members.

1. "Status of operating funds from ACOA and Economic Development Requirement to register under the RDA act to receive operational funding (in progress) "

Question: Can any of those in attendance tell the great unwashed public what they were told and what discussion if any ensued respecting operational funding and the requirement for SWSDA to register under the RDA Act?

2. "... status provided for several projects ..."

Question: Can any of those in attendance tell the public what they were told and what discussion if any ensued respecting the status of any and all projects currently being managed by SWSDA and in particular what was the Status of Shelburne County projects?

3. "... $716,858 invested from the sale of the Shelburne Youth Centre ..."

Question: Can any of those in attendance tell the us what they were told and what discussion if any ensued respecting the status of the funds invested from the sale of the Shelburne Youth Centre and in particular where has the money been invested, what interest rates are being paid and what interest has accrued to the investment since it was made, when was it made, and how was the amount to be invested determined?

4. "Process for hiring consultants explained... "

Question: Can any of those in attendance tell us what they were told and what discussion if any ensued respecting the process for hiring consultants and where a written copy of that process can be found?

5. "Clarification provided on mortgage outstanding for sale of Shelburne Park and repayment terms ..."

Question: Can any of those in attendance tell us what they were told and what discussion if any ensued respecting the mortgage outstanding for the sale of Shelburne Park and repayment terms?

6. " Discussion of travel expense process... "

Question: Can any of those in attendance tell us what they were told and what discussion if any ensued respecting SWSDA's travel expense process and where a written copy describing this process can be found, as well as a description of the process for attribution of travel expenses to various core and project budgets?

BTW: At the May meeting it was reported that the "Request for financial info on Shelburne Park will require clearance from solicitors as a court case is pending."

If that information has been provided to Board members would one of those in attendance please provide a copy. On the other hand, if it has not been provided, Board members should insist on this information before they accept the new financial statements at the September meeting of the Board and the AGM.

** (In attendance at the meeting were the following people....
Voting... Rod Rose, Phil LeBlanc, Phil Mooney, Heather MacDonald (alternate for Municipality of Yarmouth) Rachel Pictou (representing the Acadia First Nation), Sherman Embree, Elizabeth Acker, Cecil Brannon, Alonzo Townsend (alternate for Town of Lockeport), Louise Halliday
Non-voting... Doris Swaine (alternate for Municipality of Shelburne), Elizabeth Rhuland (alternate for Town of Shelburne), Donna LeBlanc-Messenger (alternate for Municipality of Barrington), Robert Maillet, Calvin Butler, Bryan Smith ( special assistant to Richard Hurlburt), Stéphane Cyr, Pat Melanson, Clyde DeViller, Michelle Blinn, Frank Anderson and David Warner.)

Great Meeting Bodes Well for Future

2009-08-28T13:22:00.003-03:00

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

SHELBURNE MEETING WITH MINISTERS

PERCY PARIS & STERLING BELLIVEAU

For those of you who couldn't attend, this morning's meeting between the two ministers and municipal officials was well attended and observed by some 25 citizens. CBC television and a reporter from the local Coast Guard newspaper also were present.

Municipal officials each had an opportunity to identify priorities in each of their communities and Minister Paris provided those assembled with assurances that the new government placed a high priority on face to face communications and focused efforts to help rural communities with their development efforts.

All in all..... I think it was a good first meeting and gave local officials, as well as residents, an opportunity to take the measure of our new government and for these two ministers to conclude that they and their colleagues should come to Shelburne County more often.......

Gawd..... Does it Ever End?!?

2009-08-27T23:01:00.003-03:00

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

Here's a decision everyone should read..... http://townofyarmouth.ca/agenda/files2/00200/217/request_for_decision_prepayment_to_yaic.pdf

Read this carefully dear reader..... and ask yourself why the three CAO's joining the Audit Committee and chairing the audit committee is an integral part of this decision....... YAIC is broke.... the same organization run by Mr. Anderson and his supportive Board of Directors... in fact in some instances the same characters running SWSDA..

Read Shelburne County Today for details and the search by Yarmouth County municipalities for transparency or go to the URL above to read the background document......and pass it on to those who still believe that Mr. Anderson and SWSDA should manage anything in Shelburne County.

Oh...... Did I mention?

2009-08-26T21:36:00.008-03:00

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

Spoke to Service Nova Scotia representative today and was told that to his knowledge the former Minister Jamie Muir did not write a separate letter to SWSDA about the UNSM's resolution on the provision of municipal guarantee's for RDA's.... SURPRISE!

Rather.... I am told that the Department wrote to the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities (UNSM), providing a response to all of the resolutions passed by the UNSM.. You can find this resolution and the purported response at http://www.unsm.ca/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=157&Itemid=102

Let's read this "response" from the Minister and see if we should be reading between the lines..... Here's what his "response" says.......

1. "There are a number of issues that have to be taken under consideration..." Where I come from this means.... Whoa... not so fast..... this is more complicated than you suggest....

2. "...for this request to move away from the long established policy that limits guarantees..." I believe in government-speak this means.... We've had this policy for a long time and it is well established.... we really would need incredibly good reasons and justification for changing the way we've done it .

3. "My Department will discuss this matter with the Department of Economic Development..." This means.... it will get complicated and they may not be willing to support this suggestions so we make no promises.

4. "...as well as the Municipal Finance Corporation, the entity responsible for issuing borrowing debentures on behalf of municipal government." As I read it this means.... and if the Department of Economic Development has no objections.... my fallback position will be to refer this to the guys who really decide the borrowing and lending powers of municipalities.... Hey ... pay attention... we're talking BORROWING DEBENTURES HERE! Not just loan guarantees..... this is complicated stuff....

RESPONSE:
There are a number of issues that have to be taken under consideration for this request
to move away from the long established policy that limits borrowing guarantees to
municipal corporations that have established under the Municipal Government Act. My
Department will discuss this matter with the Department of Economic Development,
who is responsible for the Regional Community Development Act, as well as the
Municipal Finance Corporation, the entity responsible for issuing borrowing debentures
on behalf of municipal government.
The Honourable Jamie Muir

NOPE..... THIS IS THE KIND OF RESPONSE GOVERNMENT WRITES WHEN THE ANSWER IS NO.... I WOULDN'T TAKE MUCH COMFORT FROM IT IF I WERE MR. ANDERSON....

Indeed... it looks like Mr. Anderson is trying to make something out of thin air.... sorry... doubt it'll work this time......

What do you think?

So ......Ask Frank!

2009-08-26T21:22:00.002-03:00

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

And that is just what they did......

Three ladies from Shelburne were in Yarmouth today and were talking about my earlier question about SWSDA's Annual General Meeting (AGM) and SWSDA's Audited Financial Statements to the end of March 2009.

Sooo.... being the concerned citizens that they are...... they stopped in at SWSDA and asked Mr. Anderson himself!!!!

And, now we have it directly from the horse's mouth.... AGM and financial statements are scheduled for mid- September.... sometime.......!!!

Thanks ladies... couldn't have done it without you!

If you have unanswered questions or if you would like documents from SWSDA .... call or write Frank and ask him......I hear he is obliging (;-).....

Here's his contact information:

P.O. Box 131, 233 Water Street, Yarmouth NS B5A 1M1 Tel: 902-742-3210 Fax: 902-742-3107 Email: yarmouthinfo@swsda.com or frank@swsda.com

Let us know if you get a response........

Ed

Lessons in Public Service...

2009-08-26T12:09:00.006-03:00

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

When I heard it.... it bothered me......!!

Monday evening at the ..... the Municipality of Barrington Council Meeting I watched with interest as private citizens who had been kept in the dark about a mink ranch development initiative, questioned the Warden and Council members and sought to stop the project.

Then I heard Councillor El-Jakl and Warden Halliday .... each state that they personally had done the best they could for the municipality, ensuring that everything that was done, " ...was done legally...". Something about those statements bothered me and over the last few days the thought has been buzzing around in my head .... what's wrong with doing things legally?

Of course.... that's not the problem.... the problem is that elected officials and public servants aren't just called upon to do things legally..... they are required by the positions they have been entrusted with to... "...do the right thing...".

That dear reader is more.... indeed much more... than doing things legally.

Rather, my fellow citizens .... in addition to meeting legal requirements, we expect elected officials and hired staff in our governments to use common sense, their training, skills, connections and experience to guide their interventions on behalf of the public.... and we expect them to seek expert advice and public input without hesitation when appropriate if the public's interests might be at risk or if the public has private and/or collective interests that might be impacted by decisions made by government.

On the other hand.... it is hard to see how the public can be expected to participate and provide meaningful, constructive input into government deliberations if those charged with the responsibility of providing government services, insist on keeping public information and deliberations secreted to the back-rooms by using trumped-up pretexts to justify in camera sessions and confidentiality.

Oh... and to make sure I am not misunderstood.... my view is that this tendency to secrecy is not a new phenomenon and did not start with the present pool of elected officials and civil servants... the problem has existed for some time and unfortunately it is now being visited on people who have simply continued to do things they way they were always done.

Solution.....!! Stop doing things the way they were always done .... and devise ways to conduct public affairs in a manner that ensures that the public is informed and engaged so that they can contribute to the healthy conduct of public affairs.

My two cents!

No Better Way to Celebrate Democracy 250!!

2009-08-26T08:54:00.004-03:00

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

Well dear reader.... it appears we are beginning a new political era.... with the opening to the public of Friday's meeting between municipal officials in Shelburne County and new Provincial Ministers who are responsible for six portfolios. Providing the public with the opportunity to hear the questions asked and the answers given is what democracy is all about......

As you can tell from the comments of your fellow readers ..... hopes and expectations are high (for the most part).... even though some comments remain cynical and critical. More importantly folks appear ready to demand more openness from our politicians and public servants in the conduct of public affairs....

Witness the recent public outcries and demands for answers ..... in Barrington, Tusket, the Municipality of Yarmouth ..... and even the Town of Yarmouth.... a call to stop public bodies from conducting public business behind closed doors with little recorded evidence of what transpired has gone out from the public and smart politicians will heed the call.... now!

This fledgling movement .... for access to information and transparency must be at the heart of informed dialogue between government and the governed respecting public issues .... and that is terrific!

Friday's opportunity for the public to listen in on a conversation between two levels of government ......is an important first step on the path to better governance and bodes well for the future..... I'm certainly looking forward to it and I hope you are too.

By the way...... If you get a chance to attend you might consider bringing along your older children and explaining to them the importance of informed public participation in a democracy..... they'll thank you in the years to come.

PUBLIC INVITED TO OBSERVE!

2009-08-25T16:31:00.002-03:00

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

THE GOOD NEWS IS......

YOUR ARE INVITED TO OBSERVE
THE MEETING OF MINISTERS PARIS AND BELLIVEAU
WITH SHELBURNE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL POLITICIANS & OFFICIALS

AUGUST 28, 10:30 A.M.
KING STREET COMMUNITY CENTRE
(FIRE HALL)

CONCERNED CITIZENS MEETING WITH MINISTER!

2009-08-24T14:55:00.010-03:00

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

Dear Reader,

It appears I have made a mistake and my mother used to say if you do..... the best thing is to apologize quickly.

I made a mistake and want to apologize to Sterling Belliveau and Percy Paris for any inconvenience caused by my premature announcement of a public meeting with the Minister this coming Friday. This confusion is my fault and I am sorry.

Unfortunately, I was in error announcing a public meeting at this time....for that, I also want to apologize to my readers.

Sincerely,

Ed Cayer

Accountability - Residents of Municipality of Barrington

2009-08-19T12:56:00.002-03:00

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

Concerned Citizens in Barrington

This Week's Coast Guard reports about.... local concern in Barrington about a land deal involving SWSDA, the Yarmouth Industrial Commission, transfers of money from Barrington to SWSDA and commitments to provide more land..... with lots of unanswered questions....

Check out Shelburne County Today for details in the coming days. In the meantime, readers who have a bit of a command over our two official languages might be interested in reading or listening to today's report broadcast on Radio Canada from Clare reporter Danielle Marchand should go to the url below.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/atlantique/2009/08/19/002-NE-enquete-agence.shtml

Qeustions, Questions.... What's your Answer?

2009-08-18T15:55:00.002-03:00

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

Aug 18, 1:54 PM Anon. Asked my motive......for asking all this questiosn a few posts ago.....

Simple...... those are the questions that need to be answered by the community if you are setting up a new RDA.... or they will be decided by the folks in Halifax.

Soo... let's start the survey.

Question # 1 ... Would you like your new RDA to serve Clare, the present municipalities in Yarmouth County as well as the five in Shelburne?

Question # 2 ... Would you prefer your new RDA to serve only Shelburne County?

Question # 3 ... Would you prefer your new RDA to serve only Eastern or Western Shelburne County?

In addition to your vote, your views on which would be most beneficial to your community would be interesting.

Send them in today along with your vote and get others to express their views.....

Psst... Want to know a Secret?

2009-08-18T10:31:00.002-03:00

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

SECRET MEETING ARRANGED & CANCELLED

Just got a copy ..... and wanted to share......

----- Original Message -----

From: Frank Anderson Cc: Frank Anderson ; Dave Warner

Sent : Thursday, June 25, 2009 3:38 PM
Subject: Invitation Please advise your alternate of this meeting.

To all board members: We have been able to organize a meeting with senior representatives of the Department of Economic and Rural Development (Neal Conrad) and the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (Mel Coombs) for Thursday, August 13 at 2:00pm. They will be able to provide some knowledge of the important role that municipalities play in the regional development authority process and how the authority will operate under the Regional Community Development Act of 1996. When the South West Shore Development Authority was established in 1995 as a not-for-profit society, it determined its structure, its operational plan, its priorities and its marketing strategy. Over the years, the authority has continued to provide support for all municipal units and many community groups and carried out their mandate to develop a strategic plan and implement the plan to create economic stability in the region. In preparation for this meeting, they have asked that we put together a list of questions so that they can be prepared with some answers. The session will be held in the boardroom of the South West Authority in Yarmouth. If there is sufficient interest expressed by municipal councils to have other councillors to attend, we will identify a more appropriate location for the meeting. Please mark this in your calendar and provide some of your questions that will help you to understand the process and the Regional Community Development Act.

Frank Anderson Chief Executive Officer

Then on Wednesday August 12 the following message was sent out......

The meeting in Yarmouth tomorrow with Neal Conrad, Economic Development, and Mel Coombs, ACOA, Re: Reincorporation of S.W.S.D.A., has been cancelled until further notice.

When asked about the cancellation some Board members indicated ..... that Halifax cancelled the meeting because they were still preparing written answers to the questions asked by members and councilors.....

Thought you should know....

ENOUGH!

2009-08-14T12:22:00.002-03:00

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

BEFORE ..... OUR COLLECTIVE COUNCILS HOLD SECRET MEETINGS!
BEFORE ..... WARDENS AND COUNCILLORS MAKE DECISIONS WITHOUT PUBLIC INPUT!
BEFORE .... ELECTED OFFICIALS MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT THINGS THEY HAVEN'T THOUGHT THROUGH!
BEFORE .... MEMBERS OF SWSDA'S BOARD MAKE DECISIONS THAT WE CITIZENS WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH!
BEFORE... ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ACOA AND SWSDA ENGAGE IN SECRET NEGOTIATIONS!
BEFORE.... OTHERS WITH VESTED INTERESTS IN OUR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ARE DISENFRANCHISED!

INVITE CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE IN AN INFORMED PUBLIC DIALOGUE ABOUT OUR FUTURE RDA OR RDAs.....!!!!

Join the Concerned Citizens Committee of Shelburne County and demand a meeting with councils and officals from Economic Development. To join just send me an email indicating you want to participate in the dialogue to create a new RDA for Shelburne County. Write to aacayer@gmail.com and I will add you to our mailing list and give you an opportunity to sign petitions to get your council to engage in public dialogue.

RDA TUTORIAL TEST QUESTIONS....

2009-08-14T08:09:00.002-03:00

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

Questions That Need Answers .... Before applications are made to the Minister for any new RDA, here are questions that citizens might want answered to their satisfaction by elected Municipal officials.

1. What municipal areas are to be covered by the new RDA?
2. What three year strategy will the included municipality or municipalities use as their basis for applying to the Minister for the creation of a new RDA, who will prepare the strategy and who will approve it?
3. What shall the new RDA be called?
4. How many members on the Board of Directors should be appointed by the councils of the participating municipalities and how should they be selected for appointment?
5. How many members on the Board of Directors should be representatives of the economic sectors and other relevant groups within the area, who should they represent and how should they be selected?
6. What should be the term of office of members of the Board of Directors of the new RDA and what should be the conditions under which members of the Board of Directors cease to be members of the Board.
7. What should determine the proportion in which each of the participating municipalities contribute to and provide the funds required to meet the expenses of the new RDA?
8. When should these payments be made to the new RDA?
9. What officers should the new RDA have, how should the new RDA be organized and how, when and where should meetings of the new RDA be held for transaction of the RDA's business?
10. What should be the fiscal year of the new RDA?
11. How should the assets of the new RDA be disposed should it cease to operate?
12. What role should the new RDA play in the following areas:
a) advising municipal councils with respect to matters affecting economic and social development;
b) promoting interest in the activities of the RDA;
c) encouraging and assisting the participation of the public, private and voluntary sectors;
d) preparing, updating and implementing a strategy and action plan for the development of the communities within the RDA;
e) encouraging interested groups and the public in participating in the strategic planning process and setting priorities for development action;
f) acting as financial, industrial, promotional, marketing, training and planning advisers with respect to the development of the communities within the RDA in accordance with the strategic plan;
g) encouraging the formation of partnership groups to evaluate, plan and organize implementation of specific development actions and projects that fall within the framework of the strategy;
h) facilitating contact with those who may be able to to provide technical, professional and policy resources needed to enable project groups to be effective;
i) facilitating access to those who may be able to provide funding to implement projects and business plans in accordance with the strategy;
j) provide managerial technical, or other support services to other business or operations of any community development group, company, syndicate, labour group, non-profit organization, cooperative, partnership, enterprise or undertaking in respect of achieving the purpose of the Act;
k) providing training to those individuals or groups involved in regional community planning to assist in the implementation of the strategy;
l) collecting, analyzing and disseminating information;
m) cooperating with governments and agencies of governments?
13. What provisions should the bylaws of the new RDA include respecting:
a) the conduct and duties of the officers and employees of the new RDA;
b) the method of calling meetings and conducting business at meetings;
the order and proceedings of meetings;
c) public access to information respecting the activities of the new RDA and meetings of the RDA?

What now.... well dear reader.... that' is the burning question?!?

Who will decide the public's wishes respecting these questions?

Were any of the present council members, mayor, or wardens elected on a platform respecting the creation of RDAs under the Act?

Of course not..... so without input from the public.... where do they get the mandate to transform the present RDA into the one that likely will determine our social and economic development progress in the coming decade?

NO DEAR READER.... I BELIEVE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCILS IN OUR AREA OWE A DUTY OF DUE DILIGENCE AND PUBLIC CONSULTATION TO VOTERS BEFORE THEY RATIFY MORE OF THE SAME OR A COMPLETELY NEW STRUCTURE....

What do you think? Your views are important......

RDA -101 Tutorial

2009-08-14T03:50:00.006-03:00

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

INTRODUCTION

The recent decision by the Department of Economic Development to enforce and apply the Regional Community Development Act's provision for incorporation and management of RDAs bodes well for the future..... IF CITIZENS ENSURE THAT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS CREATE LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE TRULY ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

This posting provides the text of the Act and our commentary for readers in order to familiarize our readers with issues arising as a result of these coming changes.

The recent letter from the Deputy Minister of Economic Development requires all RDAs to be incorporated under the Regional Community Development Act before the end of March 2010..... or lose funding from the Federal and Provincial Governments. As a result, the Deputy's letter provides new opportunities for citizens to regain organizational control of the development agency services provided to citizens in Shelburne County..... IN THE NEXT SEVEN MONTHS!

So what does that mean? In the next 7 months, municipalities in Shelburne County have the opportunity to do one of the following.

1. Re-establish SWSDA as an RDA with its existing membership of nine municipalities by requesting the Minister to incorporate a new body under the Act. Should the Minister agree he will also have the opportunity to agree to a definition of the structure and mandate of the newly-reconstituted RDA.

2. Establish one or more new RDA's to provide development services to one or more muncipalities in Shelburne County to replace the services presently provided by SWSDA. Should this happen, again a new opportunity will present itself to completely re-shape the local RDA servicing our communities.

Here's the Act and commentary......

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Regional Community Development Act
CHAPTER 29
OF THE
ACTS OF 1996
An Act to Encourage and FacilitateCommunity-based Planning forEconomic, Social and Institutional Change

Short title
1 This Act may be cited as the Regional Community Development Act. 1996, c. 29, s. 1.
Purpose of Act
2 The purpose of this Act is to encourage and facilitate community-based planning for economic, social and institutional change by
(a) enabling, upon the request of a municipality or of participating municipalities, the establishment of regional community development agencies to work with the community to plan and carry out regional development strategies and action plans that will further the development of the community;
(b) facilitating the co-ordination of provincial and municipal public sector development programs affecting the roles of private and voluntary sector groups, labour groups, companies, non-profit organizations, co-operatives, universities and community colleges in the support of community development;
(c) assisting regional communities in developing local planning capability, institutional capability, community entrepreneurship and the essential infrastructure that will promote the creation of business investment, jobs and opportunities for individuals through education, training and participation in locally driven ventures; and
(d) improving the economic and social conditions of rural and urban areas of the Province. 1996, c. 29, s. 2.

Comments - It should be noted that the purpose of RDAs is not to replace local efforts by taking over development but rather to support local development capacitybuilding efforts - note in particular 2(a) and ((c).

Interpretation
3 In this Act,
(a) "agency" means a regional community development organization established pursuant to this Act;
(b) "development" means economic, social and institutional change brought about by a broadly representative community process aimed at improving the community as a better place to live and work;
(c) "Minister" means the Minister responsible for the Nova Scotia Economic Renewal Agency, including Tourism Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia Marketing Agency;
(d) "municipality" means a regional municipality, town or rural municipality;
(e) "participating municipality" means a municipality that is represented on an agency;
(f) "regional community" means the geographic area of one or more municipalities located within the boundary of an area of locally accepted economic development interest;
(g) "regional development strategy" means a three-year comprehensive multi-sectoral economic and social development program prepared in consultation with community groups and individuals. 1996, c. 29, s. 3.

Comments - First please note at 3 (a) that RDAs must be established pursuant to THIS Act... not the Societies Act. For the better part of 13 years Economic Development has permitted SWSDA and others to operate under the Societies Act like "rogue" RDAs, unfettered by the rules and regulations that this Act imposes on real RDAs. Second, please note 3 (b)'s focus on development taking place as directed by a broadly-based and representative community process.... not one controlled and dominated by municipal politicians or their appointees as is presently the case!

Supervision and management of Act
4 The Minister has the general supervision and management of this Act. 1996, c. 29, s. 4.

Personnel
5 Such employees as are necessary for the administration of this Act shall be appointed in accordance with the Civil Service Act. 1996, c. 29, s. 5.

Regional community development agencies
6 (1) Where a municipality or municipalities propose to prepare and adopt a regional development strategy for the municipality or municipalities, respectively, the municipality or municipalities, as the case may be, may request that the Minister establish a regional community development agency for the area covered by the regional development strategy.
(2) Upon receiving a request from a municipality or municipalities pursuant to subsection (1), the Minister may, by order, establish a body corporate to be the regional community development agency for the area covered by the regional development strategy.
(3) An order made pursuant to subsection (2) may specify
(a) the name of the agency;
(b) the regional community for which the agency may exercise powers;
(c) the municipalities that are to be represented on the agency;
(d) the number of members on the agencys board of directors to be appointed by the councils of the participating municipalities;
(e) the number of members of the agencys board of directors to be representatives of the regional communitys economic sectors and other relevant groups;
(f) the term of office of members of the board of directors of the agency and the conditions under which members of the board of directors cease to be members of the board;
(g) the proportions in which each of the participating municipalities shall contribute to and provide the funds required to meet the expenses of the agency, subject to the participating municipalities ability to approve its contribution on an annual basis;
(h) the date when the contribution of each participating municipality is to be paid to the agency;
(i) the officers and organization of an agency and how and when meetings of the agency are to be held and the business of the agency transacted;
(j) the fiscal year of the agency;
(k) such other matters as the Minister deems necessary to carry out effectively the intent and purpose of this Act.
(4) A vacancy on the board of directors of an agency does not impair the right of the remaining members to act or the corporate capacity of the agency.
(5) A member of an agencys board of directors or a municipalitys advisory committee is not entitled to remuneration for serving on the board or committee, excluding reimbursement of expenses actually incurred.
(6) An order made pursuant to this Section may be varied or rescinded by the Minister after notice to all participating municipalities.
(7) The Minister may disestablish an agency and determine the manner of disposing of the assets of the agency. 1996, c. 29, s. 6.

Comments - This section of the Act is VERY important because it provides for the definition of the RDA created at the behest of the municipality or municipalities, its structure, representation, replacement of Board members, the fiscal year, the officers and organization of RDAs and the conduct of their meetings, terms of office, ..... and much more. This section should be the subject of public consultation by municipalities before they approach the Minister to either re-constitute SWSDA or create new RDAs.... AND MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO TAKE PLACE IN SECRET MEETINGS BETWEEN SWSDA, THE PRESENT BOARD AND PROVINCIAL OR FEDERAL BUREAUCRATS! I have personal views on much of this but would prefer to keep them to myself until we have an opportunity to have a public dialogue about these things.

Powers of agency
7 (1) An agency may
(a) advise the council of any participating municipality with respect to matters affecting the economic and social development of the regional community;
(b) promote interest in activities of the agency and encourage and assist the participation of public, private and voluntary sector groups;
(c) prepare, update at regular intervals and implement a strategy and action plan for the development of the regional community;
(d) encourage interested groups in participating in the strategic planning process and set priorities for development action;
(e) act as financial, industrial, promotional, marketing, training or planning advisers with respect to the development of the regional community in accordance with a regional development strategy;
(f) encourage the formation of partnership groups to evaluate, plan and organize implementation of specific development actions and projects that fall within the framework of the regional development strategy;
(g) facilitate contact with those who may be able to provide technical, professional and policy resources needed to enable project groups to be effective;
(h) facilitate access to those who may be able to provide funding to implement projects and business plans in accordance with a regional development strategy;
(i) provide managerial, technical or other support services to other business or operations of any community development group, company, syndicate, labour group, non-profit organization, co-operative, partnership, enterprise or undertaking in respect of achieving the purpose of this Act;
(j) provide training to those individuals or groups involved in regional community planning to assist in the implementation of a regional development strategy;
(k) collect, analyze and disseminate information;
(l) co-operate with governments and agencies of governments;
(m) perform such other functions or duties as are assigned to an agency by the Minister.
(2) An agency may enter into agreements with the Government of Canada respecting the sharing of expenses associated with the encouraging and facilitating of community development. 1996, c. 29, s. 7.

General powers of agency
8 (1) An agency may exercise such powers as are necessary or conducive to attaining the objects of the agency and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, may
(a) acquire by way of grant, gift, devise or otherwise funds to carry out the objects of the agency;
(b) invest any money of the agency not immediately required for the purpose of the agency;
(c) enter into agreements with the participating municipalities, the Province or the Government of Canada with respect to the funding of the agency;
(d) employ such persons as are deemed necessary by the agency to carry out the objects and purpose of the agency and determine the remuneration of such persons;
(e) do such other acts or things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the objects and purpose of the agency.
(2) Subject to the approval of the Minister, an agency may make by-laws for the internal management of the agency and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, may make by-laws
(a) respecting the conduct and duties of the officers and employees of the agency;
(b) respecting the method of calling meetings and the conduct of business at meetings;
(c) respecting the order and proceedings at meetings;
(d) designating a name for the person who presides over meetings. 1996, c. 29, s. 8.

Comments - Again, a very important section of the Act that those creating any new RDA under the Act should discuss with the public to determine the public's wishes respecting the operation of the new RDA.

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.
(3) An agency shall, not later than June 30th in each year, submit to each of the participating municipalities and the Minister an audited statement for the immediately preceding fiscal year showing
(a) the revenue for the immediately preceding fiscal year;
(b) the expenditures;
(c) a revenue fund balance sheet as of the close of the fiscal year;
(d) changes in the surplus or deficit account during that fiscal year with explanations of such changes;
(e) an auditors certificate; and
(f) such other information and accounts as the participating municipalities or Minister may require. 1996, c. 29, s. 9.

Comments - Section 9 has to do with control, transparency and public access to the new RDA's financial reports and accounts. Again, public input in ensuring this section of the act is adhered to is critical to future avoidance of the financial sham we've been subjected to by SWSDA as a result of their secrecy and failed accountability systems.

10 (1) An agency shall, not later than January 31st in each year, submit to the council of each participating municipality for approval an estimate of the amount required from each of them for the purpose of the agency for that year.
(2) Sums paid pursuant to this Act are held to be sums required for the ordinary lawful purposes of the municipality.
(3) Sums paid by a council prior to the coming into force of this Act to an incorporated body whose objects are similar to those of an agency under this Act are deemed to be sums required for the ordinary lawful purposes of the municipality. 1996, c. 29, s. 10.
Annual progress reports
11 An agency shall annually submit to the council of each participating municipality and the Minister a report detailing the progress made in achieving the objectives of the regional development strategy. 1996, c. 29, s. 11.
Interpretation
12 Nothing in this Act means or shall be construed to mean that
(a) an agency created pursuant to this Act is a Crown corporation or an agency of Her Majesty in right of the Province; or
(b) any property, right, privilege or obligation of any agency is the property, right, privilege or obligation of Her Majesty in right of the Province. 1996, c. 29, s. 12.
Regulations
13 (1) The Governor in Council may make such regulations as the Governor in Council deems necessary to carry out effectively the intent and purpose of this Act.
(2) The exercise by the Governor in Council of the authority contained in subsection (1) is regulations within the meaning of the Regulations Act. 1996, c. 29, s. 13.
Repeal
14 Chapter 116 of the Revised Statutes, 1989, the Cumberland Development Authority Act, is repealed. 1996, c. 29, s. 14.
Proclamation
15 This Act comes into force on such day as the Governor in Council orders and declares by proclamation. 1996, c. 29, s. 15.

Proclaimed - April 22, 1997In force - April 22, 1997

How the Ombudsman Discovered SWSDA.....

2009-08-13T10:35:00.007-03:00

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

A STORY THAT SHOULD BE TOLD

One reader recently asked who had asked the Ombudsman to intercede.......

Well..... grab a cup of coffee, put your feet up, relax and let me tell you the story of how citizen outrage was transformed into an investigation of the previously unreachable (I almost wrote untouchable) organization known as the South West Shore Development Authority or SWSDA.

A long, long time ago .... a time shrouded in the mist of previous municipal elections.... when Paulette Scott was Warden of the Municipality of Shelburne and Co-Chair of SWSDA, the Municipality hired a retired Halifax City accountant and financial guy. Having identified what were thought to be irregularities in the operations of the Municipality Council gave him the lofty position of Acting Chief Administrative Officer (aka the Acting CAO).... a fella by the name of Reg Ridgely.

And it came to pass..... that SWSDA was finding it increasingly difficult to find creative ways to finance its various overheads and costs .... off the backs of unwitting municipalities and uninformed taxpayers...... and lo and behold..... a proverbial godsend in the form of a two hundred acre property (known as the Former Nova Scotia Boys School) with over twenty buildings with a replacement cost of over $20 million became available ... and the Province thought.... this is good!

And in a blink of an eye.... the property and $625,000 to maintain it prior to its sale were transferred to SWSDA for the Authority to dispose of.....

AND TO ASSIST SWSDA..... A bold plan was concocted and staff reports were generated by the Acting CAO for the Municipality of Shelburne, for the Municipality to acquire by purchase or lease, the former Boys School as well as another property owned by SWSDA.... the former Naval Base CFS Shelburne.....

and the Warden, SWSDA and their supporters smiled and held meetings in secret..... assuming that the taxpayers would never notice .....

for they seldom paid attention to the machinations of the Municipality during the early summer and the municipal budget season which coincided with the cake and carnivals known locally as Founders Days....

But wait! To The Warden, the former Warden, the Acting CAO and SWSDA's chagrin .... taxpayers began to notice and the crowds attending budget and Council meetings grew larger and the questions asked more persistent and probing!

Hundreds..... nay more than a thousand attended budget meetings.... CBC sent reporters and television crews from Halifax, others started reporting about an obvious rebellion mounting on the South Shore.....

and the Warden, SWSDA and their supporters smiled a little less.... finally calling Mr. Anderson and his good friend Ralston MacDonnell to come help quell the rebellion with soothing words and platitudes, newspeak and double-speak....

But the crowds were not assuaged ..... and they continued to ask questions and remind elected officials that.... new elections were coming and they would be held accountable (and they were.... but that's another story).

And the proposals were defeated..... but not before a petition with more than 500 signatures was compiled and sent to Ministers and the Premier..... and the Ministers and Premier did nothing (and they were held accountable .... but that too is another story...)

And so a small group calling itself "the Concerned Citizens of Shelburne" .... came together and wrote to the Ombudsman to seek the help of his Office in reviewing what had transpired..... and for two years they met with the Ombudsman's Office awaiting the Supreme Court's decision that SWSDA was a "Municipal Body" and therefore subject to the Ombudsman's Act, the Freedom of Information Act and other Provincial Legislation.....

And it came to pass that the investigation was initiated some years later (in the fall of 2008 and after Paulette Scott, Pat Nickerson and Reg Ridgely no longer were in the story.)

The morale of this story is that a small group of citizens have power if they are informed and if they act...... The report and recommendations of the Ombudsman's Office are expected this fall.

Guide to Results Based Management Framework

2009-08-08T20:23:00.002-03:00

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

To Anon 8:10 PM - Here is the Treasury Board Guide on doing a framework which sets out objectives and how to measure them before implementation begins..... hope this helps.... it is destined to provide guidance to Federal Deputy Ministers and Ministers to report back to Parliament....

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/eval/pubs/RMAF-CGRR/RMAF_Guide_e.pdf

Ed

RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT AND REPORTING (RBMR)

2009-08-08T15:38:00.005-03:00

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

For nearly twenty years Canadian government agencies including the Federal Treasury Board, international organizations, NGOs, foreign governments and others have worked to enhance the ability to improve the performance and results produced by projects, programs, policies and/or other planned initiatives.

In its simples form, the focus of that effort has been on measuring ..... the effectiveness and efficiency of the use and application of inputs ----> to generate activities ------ > that produce outputs that yield ---> desired RESULTS AND IMPACTS. e.g. ingredients and skills for making a pie ----> lead to making of pie crust, preperation of fruit filling and baking of pie and
invitation of local newspaper food critic ---> that produces the dessert course of a multi-course dinner consumed by the food critic ----> that results in rave reviews in local newspaper that leads to an increase in business.

You can google RBM Treasury Board, Google Result Based Management or take a look at a good power point presentation at http://www.ccrda.org/files/54/files/CCRDA_RBM_Presentation.pdf It provides a bit of background to the genesis and present use of RBM if you are interested.

All this to let you in on a little secret...... From what I can see, neither ACOA or Economic Development are terribly interested in measuring results.... rather the process seems designed to be superficial, without any evidence of causal links between monies invested, activities initiated, outputs produced or impacts and results measuring social and/or economic development. Following is the one page document entitled "South West Shore Development Authority Summary of mid Year Review".

I invite you dear reader to take a look at SWSDA's web page and the 2009-2010 Plan laid out there at:

http://www.swsda.com/userfiles/ABusiness%20Plan%202009-2010%20for%20website(3).pdf

1. Problems you'll encounter include that Annex C identifed in the table of contents dealing with the evaluation of the program for 2008-2009 is not included in the SWSDA web page.... soooo no one knows what success they've claimed for what.

2. Their logic framework appears to be a toothless bastardized version of logic frameworks used in all these models by other organizations. That is because SWSDA and ACOA/Economic Development appear to be basing the conclusions they draw on what they call "measures of success" like lower unemployment.... without having to qualify or quantify what employment level changes are directly attributable to the investments/expenditures/action of SWSDA or even identifying what unemployment levels are presently..... what is missing is what folks call the causal link ..... determined by the measurement of OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATORS (OVIs).... for each impact, result, output, activity, or input identified.

UNFORTUNATELY THERE ISN'T AN OVI IN SIGHT IN EITHER SWSDA OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT'S MODELS......OR REPORTS.

SWSDA Employees

2009-08-08T13:41:00.001-03:00

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

For those who are interested, SWSDA's web site provides an overview of their staff including Joan Bower the Development Officer in Shelburne..... see ....

http://www.swsda.com/index.php?a=bio

MOS -and Coast Guard... RE: SWSDA!

2009-08-08T11:45:00.007-03:00

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

Speaking of the MOS..... here is a recent report submitted to the Committee of the Whole.... Feel free to speak to Council members and the Warden to see what decisions Council made, based on this report and the clear recommendations provided by Mr. Cox.......

WHAT A CHANGE SINCE PAULETTE SCOTT, PAT NICKERSON,RAYMOND DAVIS AND REG RIDGELEY HAVE GONE! WOW!!

Why doesn't the Coast Guard provide better coverage & information about this stuff?

See http://www.shelburnecitizendrivendevelopment.blogspot.com/

for most recent comments on Coast Guard's failure......

Reply to Anonymous 8:25 AM

2009-08-08T10:54:00.002-03:00

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

Dear Anon 8:25:

Interesting you should mention MOS lawyer.... I understand that one former Councillor indicated that MOS had been advised by one of MOS' lawyers that the Base was beneficially owned by MOS. When I asked the new CAO Mr. Cox ..... I was told that the MOS lawyer had advised MOS that they were not the beneficial owners of the base. Clear as mud isn't it?!?

Given the documentation I've seen.... and Mr. Cox's letter of July 13, 2009, if MOS was a beneficial owner of the base, I believe it was solely in its capacity as a member of the SWSDA and the benefical ownership was therefore shared by all the members of the SWSDA Board.... in my humble opinion.......

Ed

AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YE FREE!

2009-08-08T00:51:00.017-03:00

BACKGROUND

A quick check of the Coast Guard ... over the past few years will show that Mr. Anderson has long maintained that costs associated with the former Shelburne Naval Station were a burden assumed by SWSDA on behalf of the Municipality of the District of Shelburne. Indeed, it appears that he did such a convincing job that his Board recently voted to consider suing the Municipality for any maintenance and operational costs incurred by SWSDA that exceeded the revenues derived by SWSDA from the acquisition, operation and disposal of the base and its assets...... (Millions of dollars we and Mr. Anderson's Board were told repeatedly, as a way to squeeze additional funds and guarantees from municipalities, we believe.....)

You will also recall dear reader the recommendations .... prepared two years ago by the former Acting CAO of the Municipality of the District of Shelburne, Reg Ridgely, recommending the purchase of the former naval base from SWSDA and the public outcry that ensued some two years ago..... I believe that mis-guided initiative supported by the former Warden Paulette Scott and others on Council at the time was in part motivated by the belief that the Municipality did have an obligation to support SWSDA's operation of the base.

FIRST PROBLEM .... Mr. Anderson's claims of costs exceeding revenues in the base's operations were never documented by Mr. Anderson or anyone else from SWSDA...... Who knows what monies and revenues were generated and collected by Mr. Anderson over the years at the base? Certainly not the SWSDA Board of Directors! Moreover, who knows if the costs attributed by Mr. Anderson to the operation of the Base are the result of poor management by the erstwhile manager of "All Things South West Nova"..... or really attributable to SWSDA's other operational activities and priorities, e.g. - its self-serving ventures in film-making and boat-building or other initiatives?

SECOND PROBLEM.... I have listened to Councilors and others ask repeatedly whether there was any agreement between the Municipality and SWSDA respecting ownership of the Base. Former Wardens Paulette Scott and Pat Nickerson's carefully worded responses were that there were "... no written agreements...".

Sooo..... a couple months ago I went to the Municipality with a Freedom of Information request seeking any documentation describing, alluding to or suggesting any contract or agreement between SWSDA and the Municipality respecting the base. Our new CAO not only searched the municipality's files but also wrote to Mr. Anderson seeking his input if he could provide any such documents. To my knowledge, Mr. Anderson never provided any evidence of contractual arrangements between SWSDA and the municipality respecting ownership of the base or agreements for the municipality to absorb cost overruns incurred by SWSDA related to the Base.

Following is a copy of the two page covering letter received from Mr. Cox in mid-July after his careful search of the Municipality's files.

CONCLUSION..... taxpayers of the Municipality of Shelburne have no contractual arrangements with SWSDA respecting ownership of the base, nor..... do they have an obligation to compensate Mr. Anderson or SWSDA for their reported MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN cost overuns incurred in the operation of the base.

IN FACT THIS WAS ALL A FABRICATION FOUND ONLY IN THE MIND OF MR. ANDERSON AS FAR AS ANYONE CAN TELL!

ANOTHER SELF-SERVING URBAN LEGEND BITES THE DUST !!!!

Sheesh!! - Impatient ... or what!?! ( ;-)

2009-08-07T11:26:00.004-03:00

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

To Anon 10:52 AM - Working as fast as these little fingers will let me!!!

Will Post new blog ASAP...... Thanks for your interest.......

Ed

To Anon 8:15 AM - The Boys School Sale was Challenged in court by OPI as being a Fraudulent Conveyance and OPI asked the court to set aside the monies from the maintenance fund and the proceeds of the sale....

When we got to trial ..... we discovered that to add insult to injury.... SWSDA swore in affidavits signed by Mr. Anderson a couple weeks before trial and confirmed at trial by his lawyer Mr. Belliveau that .... the money was gone.... had all been spent by SWSDA ...

As a result .... OPI and the municipalities agreed with SWSDA to a Consent Order from the Supreme Court to have money from the sale of the base, set aside by SWSDA to replace the Boys School monies already reportedly spent by Mr. Anderson as of early December 2007.

Since then OPI has identified what it believes are a number of problems with SWSDA's compliance with the Court's Consent Order to replace the Boys School monies and has initiated a Contempt of Court action against SWSDA that will be heard in Shelburne in late October.

OPI's application for Leave to file the Contempt Charges against SWSDA was heard in the Supreme Court and agreed to by the Court in August 2008. ..... Affidavits in these actions have been submitted and are available from the court . They set out OPI's evidence of Contempt of court by SWSDA ..... and ..... SWSDA's defence ..... claiming it was all a miss-understanding.

Hope this helps ......... Ed

Summer is Just Starting to be Interesting!

2009-08-05T02:18:00.002-03:00

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

Dear Reader:

I am back home tomorrow after a dozen glorious days in St. Andrews, New Brunswick with kids, grandkids and inlaws.... something refreshing about spending time with folks between the ages of 2 and 90!!! Great way to review and challenge perspectives.... recuperate from open heart surgery and more than four weeks in hospital....

I'll be glad to be back.... so much to do and write about......So lets get this blog back on track.......

This week's submission will begin ....... with a review of what constitutes Evaluation in today's "Best Management Practices" and the so-called "evaluation" conducted by Economic development of SWSDA.... In doing so we will talk about the standard now accepted by local, regional, national and international bodies....... "Results-Based Management AND Monitoring"....... AND ...... ask the question.... can we rely on the findings flowing from the evaluation process used by Economic Development and if not what changes should we seek in the system.....

SWSDA Mis-direction Uncovered Again

I will also share with you on this blog..... a very informative letter I received from the Municipality of Shelburne about the purported millions of dollars Mr. Anderson has repeatedly claimed was owed to SWSDA by the taxpayers of the municipality.... amazing how far one can get on bluff, bravado and BS.... Thank you Mr. Cox for helping rebut the urban legend perpetuated by former Wardens and Councillors and Acting CAOs about our collective indebtedness to SWSDA!

In my other blog I intend to end the week with a discussion of the potential structure of organized development in Shelburne County and some of the options available to ensure public participation and accountability in the process.......

We'll take a brief look at the options for creating a functional RDA, the role that a group like Team Shelburne might play, how a properly mandated Shelburne County Industrial Commission might help and become an integral part of the development team .....and what to do with inefficient and ineffective regional provincial government agencies dealing with education, community services, economic development, health and more...... I can hardly wait! We might even ask some questions about the management of marine resources and fisheries...... and energy! Keep an eye on my other blog too..... But before we do......

SO.... WHAT IS A TROLL?

From Wikipedia....

"Do not feed the trolls" and its abbreviation DNFTT redirect here. For the Wikipedia essay, see "What is a troll?".In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional or disciplinary response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[2]

Tune in on Friday......

How to ruin blogs!

2009-08-02T17:31:00.002-03:00

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

Dear Reader:

There are many ways to ruin a blog. One is to post comments provided by readers that are clearly libelous. By publishing other people's libel the blogger becomes guilty of libel. I have rejected a handful of blogs over the past few months because they made statements that could be challenged in court. Of the hundreds of comments provided by readers, a handful have been rejected by yours truly as inappropriate for that reason.

Another way to ruin a blog is to spam it with the same message repeated over and over again. That is why the coded message confirmation pops up on occasion. It is a "blogspot application" to help control spam blitzes. Only one reader has tried to do that copying a message supporting SWSDA and Mr. Anderson over a dozen times in less than three minutes.... even with the confirmation message. Needless to say, I didn't post the dozen repeated message.... although I did let one copy get through.

A third and more insidious way to destroy blogs is to raise red herrings bringing into question how the blog is administered or who reads and comments on the blog. In the last couple days an anonymous poster has done that asking rhetorical questions about the integrity of the anonymous function on this blog. Let me assure my readers that the software I am using is google software and I am unable to tell who anonymous posters are. In three comments submitted in quick succession that person has suggested that I am protecting Tim, that anonymous posts may not be anonymous, suggested that there is collusion amongst readers who choose to identify themselves as a group.... you know what I mean..... the old "do you still beat your wife " type of question. ... with a quick accusation that the lie must be true if I didn't respond to the red herring statements within 24 hours in mid-summer!

Of course all of these comments have been submitted by someone who prefers to remain anonymous... even though he/she questions the integrity of the anonymous function and keeps submitting comments.... Funny how that works.....

I have posted all of these because I wanted to share with you dear reader some of the challenges associated with managing a blog. You will of course note that had I wanted to I could have started swsdaaccountability as an anonymous blogger and google would never have identified who I was. Even a court order would not have pried my name from google had I wished to remain anonymous...... The same rules apply to those who comment on my blogs anonymously. Unless you identify yourself in your comments.... no one will ever know who you are.

SWSDA AGM

2009-07-26T06:02:00.003-03:00

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

Dear Reader:

Sorry for the long hiatus between posts.... lots of excuses..... even some good reasons! Now we are truly back....... so ..... have a seat and a read and lets get this accountability blog back in stride.

Ed

GATHERING NEWS

You will recall that SWSDA indicated that the upcoming AGM would be presented with a number of amendments to the bylaws as well as the audited financial statements of the organization.

QUESTIONS -

1. Will Board members have these documents available well before the AGM so they can review them and seek direction from their respective municipal councils?

2. Given the Deputy Minister's correspondence requiring all RDAs (including SWSDA) to be incorporated now under the Rural Communities Development Act, what purpose is served by amending SWSDA's bylaws under the Societies Act since SWSDA the Society will no longer be an RDA and no longer will be eligible for core funding as an RDA at the end of this fiscal year?

3. Will the proposed changes to the SWSDA bylaws create future obligations for the present members of the Board?

4. Has the Agenda for the AGM been circulated and has a date been set for the meeting?

5. Has SWSDA prepared a transition plan or proposal for consideration by the Board?

6. How will the present legal obligations, debt and assets of SWSDA the Society be dealt with when one or more RDAs are created to replace the old SWSDA?

7. Will municipalities be asked to provide the $506,000 in guarantees now pledged to SWSDA the Society to the new RDA or RDAs?

8. What happens to the $506,000 in municipal guarantees presently pledged for SWSDA the Society?

9. What happens to the $84,000 in additional guarantees presently provided by the Municipality of Shelburne for SWSDA?

10. What happens to the money owed by SWSDA to the Shelburne County Business Development Corporation?

Questions..... lots of questions..... anyone got answers?

In my experience SWSDA likes to make changes and get approvals from an inattentive Board in the middle of the summer.... let's hope that isn't permitted to happen again this year.

Ask your representative on the SWSDA Board..... and while you are at it let's make sure that only real Board members get to vote.... not proposed Board members or alternates who don't legally have a vote......

And So.... We Begin Anew.......

2009-07-13T09:54:00.004-03:00

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

Dear Reader,

Thank you for your patience, as I recover from my brief sojourn at the Maritime Heart Centre. I'll save you the details but suffice it to say that I am glad to be back and looking forward to the summer to do research, read, write and share with you information gathered and views expressed by folks....... Stay tuned......

DEPUTY MINISTER REPLIES

Further to my request for more information about the Evaluation of SWSDA last year, here is the reply I received from Mr. Thompson upon my return. Take a good look at the DM's reply and watch for copies of the evaluation and my comments in tomorrow's blog.

In particular, I recommend that you note Mr. Conrad's contact information ..... should you have additional questions after you've had a chance to read the info provided today and tomorrow........

Things You Should Read!

2009-06-28T13:45:00.002-03:00

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

AND........ QUESTION!!!

Following is the url for the latest minutes from SWSDA's meeting of May 27th...... Take a look and ask yourself if it answers or raises more questions.

http://www.swsda.com/index.php?p=know

Want more information?

Ask SWSDA for copies of documents and answers to your questions or send your requests to your municipal representatives..... or simply post them here as comments and I'll send them off when I get back from my brief hospital visit..... (;-)

ENJOY THE MINUTES......

New Blog!

2009-06-27T14:31:00.001-03:00

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

As promised..... I've launched the new blog and look forward to developing it over the summer with input from readers.... take a look and pass it on to others.....

http://www.shelburnecitizendrivendevelopment.blogspot.com/

Can We Afford Our Own RDA?

2009-06-27T14:00:00.001-03:00

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

For some time now I have listened to SWSDA and others deride the possibility of Shelburne having its own RDA. The primary reason given has been that we can't afford our own RDA.....

Frankly.... I don't know what a REAL RDA would cost since we've never had one... however, according to my own .... off the top of my head calculations ..... we have more than enough resources to create and successfully operate our very own development agency in Shelburne County.....

Indeed..... if push comes to shove..... we might even be able to run more than one in Shelburne County......

I haven't done all the sums but here are some preliminary figures showing funding of development and SWSDA just from the Municipality of Shelburne's financial statements over the past decade..... and I know there is more that I haven't been able to identify! I suggest the other municipalities in Shelburne County might want to take a look at their former contributions to SWSDA and for development purposes!

Here are totals I've added up for MOS .....

1998 - $12,047
1999 - $15,094
2000 - $ 73,512
2001 - $91,377
2002 - $284,429
2003 - $212,305
2004 - $269,668
2005 - $171,860
2006 - $115,567
2007 - $98,094
2008 - $105,901

Total - $1,449,854

Plus.... the Municipality of Shelburne has provided a guarantee of a loan to SWSDA for some $84,105 since 2004 and we have been paying the interest on that loan on behalf of SWSDA... It is not clear what the interest rate is but it presumably is one or two points over prime.

Plus .... the Municipality of Shelburne provides a guarantee of $61,500 on SWSDA's line of credit with the Royal Bank in Yarmouth.....

Plus ..... the Municipality of Shelburne recently provided SWSDA with an additional grant to compensate for its inability to increase its guarantee of SWSDA's indebtedness, provided a grant to SWSDA for its taxes in 2008/2009, provided another grant for its share of core funding for this fiscal year.... Plus, Plus, Plus!

Plus ..... the Municipality has provided and continues to provide SWSDA with grants and or contributions for a range of reasons including volunteer programs, etc.

Plus.... I am not certain if the numbers provided above include the monies contributed by the Municipality for construction of the Ocean Ventures Boat Shop at the Base or the Sound Stage.....

Anyway...... you get the idea..... it appears to me that SWSDA has been like a suckling pig at the teat of the Municipality of Shelburne since its inception with the complicit support of Wardens Nickerson and Scott over these many years..... SWSDA's former Co-chairs!

Thank God for the Shelburne Concerned Citizens revolution of a few years ago that stopped the former Wardens and our "Acting CAO of the Day" Reg Ridgely from pouring more of our hard earned money into the maw of SWSDA!

Question..... given the monies spent on SWSDA by the Municipality of Shelburne alone in the past.... and without getting down and counting the money spent by the other four municipalities in Shelburne County..... why can't we afford our own RDA?

A funny Thing Happened on the Way to Heart Surgery!

2009-06-27T13:44:00.002-03:00

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

For those of you who have kindly wished me well .... Thank you....

I guess a medical update is due and here it is... Last Wednesday at precisely 10:00 AM an ambulance backed into the emergency doors of Roseway Hospital and loaded yours truly into the back of the vehicle.... My journey to Halifax for open heart surgery on Thursday morning was about to begin and although filled with some trepidation, I was looking forward to having it completed and beginning rehabilitation.... and posting in earnest!

For those of you who have never had the pleasure .... ambulance rides from Shelburne to Halifax are bumpy and uncomfortable despite the caring hands of those in the "bus"..... an hour later we were entering Port Mouton when the ambulance slowed down and eventually pulled over to the side of the road....lying there, my mind went through a series of reasons why they might be stopping... including a stop for coffee... When the attendant came to the back of the ambulance, he sat down and advised me that they had just received a call advising them to return to Shelburne and Roseway.... my surgery had been cancelled because the QE2 had two heart transplants that they were working on and all other surgery would have to be re-scheduled.

Since then, we have waited for the call from Halifax and last night I was advised that I would leave Shelburne Monday morning and that my surgery was now scheduled for Tuesday June 30th!

Sooo.... here I am folks making some last minute postings to you and filling you in on what's happening.

So much to share and so little time.....

Keep posted.....

Pause Before the Break

2009-06-22T13:21:00.004-03:00

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

Well Dear Reader,

You will likely have noticed that while last week's postings from your humble servant were significant, the volume of posting's has slowed down somewhat. Two primary reasons. First, I have been a guest at Roseway Hospital since last Monday and getting access to the Internet has been a challenge...

Second, I am working on a new blog that I hope to launch on July 1st.... it will I hope, provide insight and a serious forum for the discussion of the future development of Shelburne County and the provision of opportunities for generations to come. I will launch that with a Primer on RDAs, with a quick historical perspective and information about how the original concept produced by extensive consultation with local communities in the mid-nineties was turned on its head by SWSDA and their crew.

As for the SWSDA Accountability blog, I propose to maintain it and keep reporting news and views until after our communities have sorted out the mess visited upon us by years of neglect by elected officials and secrecy and backroom dealing by SWSDA and the failure of the present agencies who are responsible for development in this region at the local and provincial levels.

Today, I want to post a couple items in keeping with past postings.

The first is Frank Anderson's Job Description .....

.... that I recently received from SWSDA. I invite you to note that fully a third of his job description as seen by Mr. Anderson falls under the rubrique "Security Functions". Whoever prepared this job description must have been copying from Dick Cheney's book on terrorism and scaring people..... .

It is hard to imagine that fully a third of the job description of a self-described "CEO" of a community development agency in Nova Scotia would fall under the title Security Functions....you'd think .... he was working in the ghettos of LA with gang bangers!

The Second is a comparison of financial reports from SWSDA ....respecting the monies remaining from the sale of the Boys School.

The critical factors to observe here are the following......

1. The date covered are significant. The first column reports expenses from April 1, 2005 to May 31, 2007. It does not include the $550,000 reportedly paid by Mr. MacDonnell for the Boys School. Unfortunately for Mr. Anderson, you should note that the school was not transferred to SWSDA until September 6, 2005 so any expenses reportedly included by Mr. Anderson in this statement for maintenance of the Boys School prior to that date should not charged to the Boys School funds.

2. The second Column reports expenses from April 1, 2005 to July 31, 2007. Unfortunately this report from Mr. Anderson not only includes expenses on maintaining the school before it was acquired by SWSDA from the Province as well as maintenance expenses attributed to the Boys School funds, 34 days after the sale of the boys school property This statement also includes the $550,000 from the sale of the Boys School on June 26, 2007.

3. The third column reports maintenance expenses again from April 1, 2005 (five months before the property was acquired by SWSDA) to September 30, 2007 (three months after the property was sold). Please note that Mr. Anderson has not added interest on this money in his calculation since July 2007.

4. The final column reports expenses from May 1, 2005 to March 31, 2008 - nine months after the Boys School property was sold. Please note that Mr. Anderson has not added interest on this money in his calculation since July 2007

This information is important because at the present time Mr. Anderson has argued that his continued use of the Boys School sales proceeds and maintenance fund are legitimate expenses of SWSDA..... go figure!!

Soooo .....why aren't any of our municipalities raising a stink about this??

Of course.... there are many more problems with this accounting by Mr. Anderson..... none that a forensic audit wouldn't solve!

In closing... I've got bad news and good news....

The good news is that I now believe that the Municipality of of Shelburne does not owe SWSDA Millions of dollars!!!

This has been more smoke and mirrors from the pro himself......

More about that next time I blog....

The bad news is that ...... I won't be able to post for the next week..... I am going to take a little forced R&R and give my body up to science for a few days.....

I'll tell you all about that next week.... in the meantime I have made arrangements to post comments as they are received..... soooo keep those cards and letters coming....

Your humble servant,

CLEVER!!!! .... THAT'S WHAT HE IS!

2009-06-18T14:01:00.002-03:00

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

JUST WHEN WE THOUGHT WE WERE ON THE RIGHT TRACK....

In my last posting.... I said SWSDA was going to disappear....

Guess I jumped the gun.... You'd think I would know better.....

In SWSDA's world.... nothing is as it appears!!

In fact dear reader.... Mr. Anderson not only doesn't intend to let SWSDA disappear.... he wants it to multiply like a rabbit according to my sources....!!

Reporters close to the scene indicate that not only does Mr. Anderson intend to keep the present SWSDA alive but he plans on creating a second SWSDA incorporated under the Regional Communities Development Act....!!

Sounds like a bad Science Fiction B- Movie.... if Mr. Anderson and his cohorts have their way, we'll have SWSDA I and SWSDA II.... !! A morphing job .... no one expected....!!

Can you imagine.... how creative is that!!!

Whatever SWSDA I can't do.... Mr. Anderson and his crew will be able to do as SWSDA II if they have their way......

AND....imagine how creative Mr. Anderson and others can be with the accounting systems, book entries and account keeping with two SWSDA's .... one that can own land and another that can't one that is separate and unencumbered by being a municipal body and one that can funnel money to the other.... wow... how neat is that!!!

Sorry folks..... I think if you want to re-define RDAs in this region and the support they provide our communities and citizens in their pursuit of social and economic development.... this is too important an exercise to have it conducted under the aegis or watchful eye of those who've led us down this path already.....SWSDA and its staff and unaccountable Board of Directors.

Lets take control of this process as concerned citizens and make sure that the politicians understand our intent to get this done right.

SWSDA TO DISAPPEAR!

2009-06-14T17:32:00.015-03:00

SO SAYS... THE NEW DEPUTY MINISTER!

In a letter dated May 26, 2009 Mr. Ian Thompson the new Deputy Minister over at Economic and Rural Development (ERD)advises SWSDA and Municipal Members of SWSDA's Board that they must be incorporated under the Regional Communities Development Act passed into law twelve years ago in 1997 to receive future funding. Below is a copy of the three page letter that I understand most councils will be considering in the coming days and weeks.

Read his letter and let me know your views. Any idea what to expect? Click on each page to expand...

See http://www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/legc/statutes/regioncd.htm for a copy of the Act.

Do you think municipal councils should hold public meetings to consult with taxpayers before they make decisions about the future of RDA's in our communities.

Which communities should future RDA's represent?...

The same nine .... presently controlled by SWSDA?

Communities in Shelburne County alone?
Should we have an RDA for Eastern Shelburne County and one for Western Shelburne County? Who should decide this and how?

LETS TALK ABOUT THIS PUBLICLY.... and make sure politicians understand what taxpayers want and where they see their future.

BTW... what happens to the more than $500,000 in guarantees provided to SWSDA by municipalities if SWSDA no longer exists?

Anyone know who ends up holding the money from the Boys School Consent Order? The $1.75 million mortgage on the base.... who owes the $475,000 mortgage to the Province for the Base..... and what about the money owed to SCBDC by SWSDA.... so many questions so few answers....

I think we should get a few .... (answers that is)

BEFORE.... FOLKS GO OFF DOING THEIR OWN THING WITHOUT TALKING TO THOSE OF US WHO SEEM TO KEEP PICKING UP THE PIECES!!

No more secret meetings and no more secret commitments made by unaccountable folks and bodies......

Here are key points to note from the letter.

1. In order to qualify for the performance based funding in the 2009-2010 fiscal year a new RDA will have to be incorporated under the Regional Communities Development Act.

2. In order to be incorporated under the Act, a municipality or group of municipalities must submit a formal written request to the Minister seeking incorporation of an RDA in our community or communities.

3. The request to the Minister must spell out:

(a) the name of the agency and it must be distinct and different from the present RDA's name;
(b) the regional community for which the agency may exercise powers;
(c) the municipalities that are to be represented on the agency;
(d) the number of members on the agencys board of directors to be appointed by the councils of the participating municipalities;
(e) the number of members of the agencys board of directors to be representatives of the regional communitys economic sectors and other relevant groups;
(f) the term of office of members of the board of directors of the agency and the conditions under which members of the board of directors cease to be members of the board;
(g) the proportions in which each of the participating municipalities shall contribute to and provide the funds required to meet the expenses of the agency, subject to the participating municipalities ability to approve its contribution on an annual basis;
(h) the date when the contribution of each participating municipality is to be paid to the agency;
(i) the officers and organization of an agency and how and when meetings of the agency are to be held and the business of the agency transacted;
(j) the fiscal year of the agency.

4. Accompanying the letter should be a copy of the proposed bylaws of the new RDA.

5. Any RDA established under the Act will be a new corporate body and will require a new name to replace the existing SWSDA name.

6. Boards are to be drawn from the broader community and should be representative of the demographic mix in the community.

7. The new performance based funding model adopted by the Department of Economic and Rural Development is designed to bring more accountability and transparency to the operations of agencies funded by the Province.

8. Lack of performance may be grouns to dis-establish an RDA.

Remember, under the Act.... RDA's are not allowed to own land.....

!!! FLASH!!!FLASH!!!FLASH!!!

2009-06-12T06:57:00.002-03:00

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

NEW BROOM - LAUNCHES NEW RDA OPPORTUNITY

THREE CHEERS FOR THE NEW DEPUTY MINISTER.....

FINALLY SENSIBLE ACTIVITY, UNFILTERED BY FRANK ANDERSON AND HIS COHORTS AT SWSDA!

Ian Thompson the new Deputy Minister of the Department of Economic Development wrote to municipal members of SWSDA, Frank Anderson and Rod Rose on May 26, 2009 with an announcement about new rules for Provincial funding of RDAs. In his letter Mr. Thompson did what the Department has failed to do for twelve years.... terrific letter.... now lets see if municipal and provincial leaders do the right thing with it...

Municipal Councils have been secretive about the correspondence but in the last few days sources in Yarmouth, Halifax and Shelburne have become more forthcoming with copies.

Check out this site Saturday evening or Sunday morning for a copy of the letter and my blog on the issue

You may want to consider talking to your Councillor, Mayor or Warden about how to deal with this new opportunity.... and how folks here expect them to start doing the right thing by local taxpayers.

LETS GET THIS DISCUSSION INTO THE PUBLIC AND OUT OF BACKROOM SECRET MEETINGS!

A Dissenting Voice...Should be Heard...

2009-06-09T22:35:00.004-03:00

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

Dear Anonymous:

Thank you for your thoughtful note.

And, of course you are right. My comments about RDA's generally, SWSDA in particular and Mr. Anderson especially are laced with sarcasm, ridicule and more than a bit of outrage. However, I fear that my writing style has distracted you from assimilating the facts that my postings are all about. For that failure I am sorry.

You are within your rights to believe what you will about Mr. Anderson, SWSDA or RDAs in our Province, as I am within my rights to publish factual information and my views about their use or what I see as possible abuse of public funds and what I consider to be a failure to do the job they claim to do with our money. Then again, you are of course free not to read about the issues I think important or my concern about public bodies and officials who operate in secret, using our resources.

As for stumbling across my blog, I am not sure how to respond to that comment.... hard to imagine how one "stumbles" over an address like www.swsdaaccountablity.blogspot.com.

Oh, by the way, my vitriol has been saved for SWSDA alone .... so far. I have asked questions about another public organization using public monies that claims to operate under a public mandate (the Nova Scotia Association of Regional Development Authorities) but fails to file its financial statements when required. This from an organization that claims to be working to enhance the professionalism of RDAs and their staff.

So dear anonymous... there you have it... I've posted your unsigned note, taken your comments to heart as your view of the world and urge you not to read this blog again if it causes you pain.

Alternatively, if you feel strongly enough about the privacy of RDA staff and the need to make RDAs accountable, as you claim, I urge you to sit down and start your own blog that supports the fine work of RDAs and our Provincial agencies. You can be sure that should I stumble over it and should I disagree with your views that I might well comment and sign my name.

So, dear anonymous.... have you figured out why I posted your comments? You may be surprised to discover that I think it is germane to the topic and apropos that we discuss your views in public.....

REASONS FOR VOTING!!!!

2009-06-09T07:02:00.002-03:00

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

Today is Election Day in Nova Scotia.....

PLEASE VOTE........

Before I left for Montreal on Sunday ....

I told you dear reader that I would tell you a bit ....about the Boys School Finances..... Here it is...!!

I will summarize but all of this information is public domain so our municipal, provincial and federal officials either have this or can get it.

Over the past couple of years SWSDA has generated financial reports about the Boys School, maintenance costs and revenues from the sale of its 21 buildings, 200 some acres of land and twenty acres of serviced and paved facilities for $550,000 to Ralston MacDonnell.... you know.... the Digby Pier Guy.... watch the time line and diminishing amount of money left over according to SWSDA and Mr. Anderson.

Here is a summary of revenues and expenses (which equal the Team Shelburne Fund) attached to Mr. Anderson’s June 19, 2007 letter to Brian Holland entitled “Shelburne Youth Centre Project Income Summary April 1, 2005 to May 31, 2007” that shows:

Province of NS $625,000.00
Interest Income $ 12,343.60
Other Income $ 2,696.50
Total Income $640,040.10
Reported Expenses $361,401.73 (Before sale of property.)
Revenues Minus Expenses $278,638.37

Here is a summary financial statement provided by SWSDA entitled “Shelburne Youth Centre Project Income Summary April 1, 2005 to July 31, 2007” that shows:

Province of NS $625,000.00
Sale of Property $550,000.00
Interest Income $ 16,190.35
Other Income $ 2,696.50
Total Income $1,193,886.85
Reported Expenses $402,189.58 (At July 31, 2007.)
Revenues Minus Expenses $791,697.27

Here is a summary financial statement provided by SWSDA entitled “Shelburne Youth Centre Project Income Summary 04/01/2005 to 03/31/2006” that shows:

Province of Nova Scotia $79,603.00
Province of Nova Scotia O.E. D. $25,000.00
Other Income $ 825.00
Total Income $105,428.00
Expenses $105,427.00
Revenues Minus Expenses $ .12

Here is a copy of the summary financial statement provided by SWSDA entitled “Shelburne Youth Centre Project Income Summary 04/01/2006 to 09/30/2007” that shows:

Province of NS $520,397.00
Sale of Property $550,000.00
Interest Income $ 16,190.35
Office Expense Transfers $ 200.00
Other Income $ 1,671.50
Total Income $1,088,458.85
Reported Expenses $306,103.00 (At September 30, 2007.)
Revenues Minus Expenses $782,355.85

Here is a copy of the financial statement provided by SWSDA entitled “Shelburne Youth Centre Project Income Summary April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2008” that shows:

Province of NS $625,000
Sale of Property $550,000
Interest Income $ 16,190.35
Other Income $ 2,696.50
Total Income $1,193,886.85
Reported Expenses $477,028.55
Revenues Minus Expenses $716,858.30

1. Keep an eye at what happens to interest payments over time.... (you will note that they end...)
2. Keep an eye on what happens to maintenance expenses for the Boys School.... AFTER IT WAS SOLD!........ remember .... it was sold on June 27, 2007......Nuff Said!

Go and vote and let's get things changed......

BOYS SCHOOL BAMBOOZLE?!?

2009-06-07T02:23:00.002-03:00

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

YOU COULD WRITE A BOOK ......

BUT EVERYONE WOULD THINK IT WAS FICTION!!

Tomorrow I've got a cheap flight to to Montreal but as soon as I get settled I promise to fill you in on a tonne of stuff...

I'll be there a week but am bring hard copy and electronic files with me so I can keep this blog alive.

IN THE MEANTIME....

I really would like to get more people involved in the blogging experience.... and I'll tell you why.....

Because I think our local media has failed us...... radio, TV, newspapers ... all of them. The fifth estate has died in this country for intents and purposes... and luckily the internet provides the perfect tool.

SOOO starting in the latter part of June I will be launching a second blog......called ....

ABOUT DEVELOPMENT ... for serious discussions about what we can do in our communities to optimize the potential we have to create opportunities and benefits for ourselves and our neighbours.... When I launch ABOUT DEVELOPMENT I'll be looking to engage folks in a constructive dialogue... without all the BS and politics and ideological debate that normally surrounds this most vital of topics.

Soo... stay tuned....

Ed

Predictions

2009-06-06T22:40:00.002-03:00

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

Predicting the Election!

I gave you my guess.... and today got a prediction for Loman Ayers.....

Here's what Loman thinks will happen.....
NDP --26
Lib -- 14
PC --11
IND -- 1

Write in with your prediction .... for the Province and for our region if you want...
With or without your name....

It should be interesting to see what people expect....

A good RDA....

2009-06-05T20:29:00.002-03:00

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

SWSDA and Mr. Anderson and Rod Rose have made that expression an oxymoron.

Hard to imageine a good RDA that either Mr. Rose or Mr. Anderson are involved with..... frankly hard to imagine the likes of many who are now involved.......

What would a good RDA do ..... in my humble opinion.... it would stop inserting itself into the development process as the power broker and help individuals and groups in their development efforts learn ahow to do it sfor themselves.

Of course, that's not what happens now.... Mr.Anderson has inserted himself into libaries, public access initiatives and or the internet, support for volunteers, employment of the unemployed and on and on.... it just doesn't seem to have an end.... I heard this week that the expansion of the library in Shelburne has been delayed while municipalities decide what to do... because SWSDA wanted to include an office for itself as part of the expenasion.

Yarmouth County

2009-06-05T12:38:00.003-03:00

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

Anyone want to comment on election in Yarmouth and prospects.... ???

For example....

If Hurlburt wins again and the Conservatives end up not even being the official opposition.... what will that do to Yarmouth's power base in the Province?

If Mooney wins.... and Liberals form the Official Opposition, who becomes the MLA in Cabinet from Yarmouth and area?

And... last but not least.... if David Olie wins... shock... bewilderment.. amazement.... would he get a Cabinet seat?

Share your views with the rest of the great unwashed...... it could be interesting.....

And regardless of who wins.... what impact do you think that will have on increased transparency and accountability?

Gone and Done It!!!

2009-06-05T12:12:00.002-03:00

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

Yep..... made a choice! One of the best things about living in a free country!

Wanna know who got my vote.... Naw..... SECRET..... that's the other nice thing about our country .... it permits the voters to vote for change or continuation of governments and/or representatives without fear of retribution... Great system..... if you use it!

Anyway, I've got a Sterling Belliveau sign and a Darian Huskilson sign on my lawn until the vote is over..... Sorry Eddie..... right now I want RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNMENT ..... and to do that means the PCs have to lose.... BIG TIME!

Here's my projection of the vote..... using the same principals as I do at the race track.... I guess..... based on very little.....

NDP 27 seats
Liberals 18 seats
Conservatives 7 seats

Any other guesses.....

HI HO! Hi HO! Its off to vote I go!!!!

2009-06-05T09:17:00.004-03:00

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

ADVANCE POLLS ... TODAY....

Going to take advantage of the advanced polls today... don't want to miss the opportunity to cast my ballot and I want to encourage all of you dear readers to exercise your right, privilege and responsibility to cast your ballot to determine who will be given the mantle of responsibility for leading our civil affairs.

VERY IMPORTANT... BUT CAN BE TOUGH.

In my case, I am caught on the proverbial horns of a dilemma..... I know.... I know the old saying.... "that's why God gave economists two hands"..... ;) On the one hand this... on the other hand that....!!

Sterling Belliveau our present MLA has always responded to my requests and met with me without hesitation and listened attentively.... the result on one occasion was his request to the Auditor General to do an audit of SWSDA.... gotta respect that..... and his leader Dexter is a thoughtful, articulate responsible soul who has been diligent and respectful of the citizen community, even as he sat in opposition for those long, lean years. I have concerns about ideologues in all parties and I know that NDPers have their share of them.

I have watched Darian Huskilson wage a lonely battle with SWSDA in his efforts to protect the interests of the folks in Shelburne County as a member of SWSDA, Chair of Team Shelburne and Mayor of Lockeport. He has done so, while the previous Wardens Scott and Nickerson appeared to be doing everything they could to frustrate his efforts. ( During one Municipality of Shelburne meeting I even heard Nickerson indicate after Mr. Huskilson had left that she thought it was rude of Mr. Huskilson to appear before MOS Council while he still appeared to have oil on his hands.) Unfortunately, not one member of Council sitting at the table (including Ms Scott who was Chairing the meeting) demanded that she retract the statement or apologize. His party Chief MacNeil I know less well but I have been listening to him attentively too. I have concerns about the old time Liberals in the party who hanker for the old days when friends could be rewarded out of public coffers.

I have spoken a number of times with Eddie Nickerson and shared my views with him about SWSDA as the presumptive PC candidate, member of Barrington's Council and member of the SWSDA Board. Alas, I am not aware of those discussions prompting any action on his part. On the other hand, I have watched his leader Rodney MacDonald make a mockery of the concept of accountability while he dragged the province back to pre-John Buchanan days, increased secrecy, reduced transparency and first-at-the-trough approach to governing. He is a failed experiment and should return to Cape Breton to write his political memoirs while someone still remembers what he did. Unfortunately folks like Chris d'Entremount who I believe is a good man in the wrong party.... get tarred with the same brush... but 10 or 15 years in the hinterland might not be bad for this party.

SOOO.... who will I vote for....?

Can't tell... don't know and probably won't decide.... until I get into the booth.... a bit like going into a good restaurant... looking at the menu.... seeing one thing you definitely don't want and two things you like but aren't sure which would be better.....

Tough, eh? And the pressure's on!!

The Galling Thing!

2009-06-05T09:04:00.004-03:00

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

Have you ever ..... seen NSARDA's Testimony Before the House Committee on Economic Development?

Ever wonder .... how long this has been going on?

Interested in taking a peek... at Mr. Anderson and Mr. Hurlburt, the dynamic duo, eight years ago and their spin on NSARDA and RDAs?

Go to..... http://www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/hansard/comm/ed/ed010911.htm

And Hansard has more if you google.... each year it seems .....with more of Mr. Anderson and Ms. Boston.... the tag team.....from NSARDA!

Peeling the Onion

2009-06-04T21:18:00.006-03:00

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

Here's stuff I didn't know.... what about you?

The Nova Scotia Association of Regional Development Authorities is another body out there using taxpayer money to .... (can't help it.... makes me smile every time I think about it) ....."help local communities" enhance their prospects for socio-economic development..... at least that's what they claim.

For the official self-promotion stuff.... visit their web site at http://www.nsarda.ca/

HOWEVER.... when you read their stuff you should remember that this group has only filed their obligatory financial statements 3 out of the 10 years that they've been around. I've just received a few of them from RJSC.

FYI.... (I know that Frank Anderson ran this group for a number of years but I can't remember which ones....)

Here's their description of the NSARDA from one of their financial statements.

"The society was incorporated on October 25, 1999 under the Societies Act of the Province of Nova Scotia. The objects of the society are to foster inter-regional initiatives among Nova Scotia RDAs, foster cooperation with other development organizations and professional associations; to encourage and support RDA board members and staff; to implement ongoing networking activities for inter-organizational information sharing; to provide a forum for discussion of issues, and to generally elevate the profession within Nova Scotia."

WHEW! These guys sound important to our future.... don't they?

Of course, its cost us a little money over the past decade.... unfortunately, its hard to tell how much because they've managed to avoid filing financials 70% of the time since they were incorporated.

But hold on..... don't get discouraged.... I did get two years of financial statements.... just for you dear readers.... had to pay for them.... but hey.... the things curiosity drives you to... you know!! I've scanned a few pages so you can get a bit of the flavour for this VITAL organization. and you can click on them below to enlarge.

Here's a bit of what I noticed...... right off the bat....

1. It appears that there were no financial statements even prepared in 2004!

2. Primary sources of funding for this bunch are ACOA, Department of Economic Development and .... of all people..... our own RDAs?!?

3. Funding and expenditures appear to have been erratic over the past decade if the three years depicted in these two statements are any indication.

4. If these three years are typical it would appear that funding and expenditures for NSARDA over the past decade is somewhere between $1 million and $2.5 million... wow!

Now let me direct your eyes to a couple things I've noticed on these summary sheets that raise questions for me......

In 2006.....

Insurance $3,250..... what were they insuring.... fishing boats?

Parking $1,346..... for staff?

Professional development and meetings $14,848.... who are they training... the folks we're already paying to train or themselves?

Salaries and benefits $130,073.... how many people does this office have?

Travel $9,513... must be traveling with the SWSDA crew... or did this cover Pat Nickerson and Frank Anderson too?

In 2005.....

Marketing and branding $21,624..... who are they marketing and branding?

Communications $24,134..... funny, I never heard from them... wonder what this paid for?

Professional development and meetings $46,077.... where'd they go for this... Fiji?!?

Salaries and benefits $153,404.... here we are in small rural communities unable to afford key staff in tourism, economic or community development.... just no justice.... or sense!

Travel $10,332.... there they go again... almost looks like they spend all their time on the road.... have you figured out what they do yet?

PAGE VIEW UPDATE!

2009-06-04T19:25:00.001-03:00

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

FLASH! FLASH!

YARMOUTH YESTERDAY - 4,880 PAGE VIEWS IN A MONTH
BARRINGTON YESTERDAY - 1,955 PAGE VIEWS IN A MONTH

Good Reviews of SWSDA Projects

2009-06-04T19:03:00.004-03:00

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

A week ago I invited readers ".... to describe all of the good things SWSDA has done... Send the documented information in about SWSDA's socio-economic development impacts in our communities that local businesses and agencies could not have done simply by going to the funding agency directly and I will gladly print them. Deal?", I said.

Gee folks.... you aren't being fair....

Surely with more than $150 million in cash and kind over the past 13 years we could write a little bit of positive stuff....

Isn't anyone going to write?

One writer today was critical of our blog because he thought comments by readers were increasingly rumour-based....

To that writer.... here's a renewed invitation to provide factual information about all the good things SWSDA has done over the last 13 years that could not have been done by the folks in our communities if they had gone directly to government departments and agencies themselves.

Surely, someone can come to SWSDA's aid.....

Since FY 2005/2006 SWSDA has spent some $15 million dollars of our tax dollars... COLD, HARD CASH....all in the cause of development in our communities .... under the watchful eyes of our representatives on their Board of Directors.

Hey!! ... staff.... Board Members.... municipal, provincial or federal governments..... anyone? Got something good to say or show for the money?

FOX RUNS HENHOUSE.....!!

2009-06-04T09:01:00.005-03:00

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

NEW FOIPOP APPOINTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT!

In a world that often provides little to smile about, I got a letter yesterday from SWSDA that did just that when it announced that .....

Frank Anderson had been designated by Rod Rose "As the responsible officer..." for freedom of information and directed that all future FOIPOP requests be sent to Mr. Anderson's attention. Don't believe me.... see Mr. Anderson's letter above .... as usual.... click to enlarge....

For those who weren't paying attention.... my freedom of information request was for Rod Rose's travel expenses!

HEAR YE, HEAR YE....READER CONTEST!

2009-06-03T16:31:00.004-03:00

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

READERS HAVE SAID THEY WANT ANSWERS!!!

And.... I want to accommodate inquisitive minds if I can.....

All of you saw the headline on today's post about only 4 of the 14 Board members of SWSDA indicating that they were interested in Board Training about their responsibilities......

Soooo.... question is..... who are the "Magnificant Ten" who believed they didn't need training.... aren't you dying to find out?

If you wanted to find out..... how would you..... ???

Here's where I'm looking to your creativity to identify this batch of rocket scientists.... people who claim to be representing us... but insist on meeting in private and in secret!

Guess they just don't want to demonstrate their knowledge and good judgement in front of too many people>...!!

AND WE HAVE PRIZES.....

FIRST PRIZE - You get a copy of all the reports about SWSDA activities that our Directors have never written or submitted to the people they represent!

SECOND PRIZE - You get to make recommendations to Mr. Anderson on how to recoup our lost $40 K in core funding.

Here are the names of Board members with their email addresses should you choose to write and ask them if they signed up for the training... and if not , why not.... should be interesting.... he said with a devilish smile on his lips and a twinkle in his eye.........

Sherman Embree – warden@municipalityofshelburne.ca
Elizabeth Acker - cessam@ns.sympatico.ca
Cecil Brannen – chh@eastlink.ca
Darian Huskilson – townoflockeport@ns.sympatico.ca
Louise Halliday – mobwarden@eastlink.ca
Bob Redding - rgr@reddingdrane.ca
Rod Rose – rod.rose@ns.sympatico.ca .... or..... rrose@swsda.com
Roger King – roger@cassanet.com
Phil Mooney – mayor.mooney@yarmouth-town.com
Charles LeBlanc - cleblanc@munargyle.com
Trevor Cunningham – trevor@district.yarmouth.ns.ca
Phil LeBlanc – imofoods@ns.sympatico.ca
Ronnie LeBlanc – If anyone has Ronnie LeBlanc’s email please send it in to the group. Alain Lombard - alan.lombard@RBC.com

STOP THE PRESSES!

2009-06-03T14:15:00.004-03:00

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

SWSDA MINUTES

April 15,2009 minutes of SWSDA Board meeting now available at http://www.swsda.com/index.php?p=know

Headlines:

SWSDA Poll of Directors shows .... Only 4 out of 14 Directors Want Training .... Remember.... you heard it here first!

SWSDA Budget Cut $40,000 ...... CEO briefed Board of Directors ..... Province cut core funding because SWSDA met expectations! How weird is that?!? I really am not laughing at SWSDA.... well maybe I am.... but only a bit..... still shaking my head..... wait... gotta pick myself up off the floor....

Little wonder Mr. Anderson wanted Province to reconsider .....

WOW! Gives a whole new meaning to the word preposterous...... Can hardly wait to get Provincial response to my FOIPOP request for copy of Performance Review and methodology....

Anyway.... read the minutes... they are better than cartoons these days....!!

Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants

2009-06-03T10:46:00.004-03:00

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

Comments just received from one of our readers indicating that the focus of the previous post was inappropriate..... not entirely sure what you would see as appropriate but ...

For that reader and others.... here is the standard disclaimer SWSDA's Auditors cover their audit statements with. Just click on it to enlarge.

I believe this reflects what the intent of an audit is.... and it goes beyond .... simply counting money .... and delves into accounting for the use of money and protecting its use.

I would draw your attention to:

a) the last two sentences in paragraph one;

b) paragraph two and in particular and the last three sentences.

Additionally dear reader.... you may be interested in bringing the following manuals to the attention of SWSDA's Board and managers.....Both are prepared by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants I believe..... . Very interesting.

20 Questions Directors of Not for Profits should ask about Governance .... http://www.cica.ca/download.cfm?ci_id=44495&la_id=1&re_id=0

20 Questions Directors of Not for Profits Should ask about Fiduciary Responsibility

http://www.cica.ca/download.cfm?ci_id=50029&la_id=1&re_id=0

Supervision and Accountability

2009-06-03T05:48:00.009-03:00

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

Effective Management....

Sound management in any organization requires checks and balances.... that goes without saying..... and most importantly, supervision. In the case of the reported $2 million dollars in travel, meeting and conference expenses of SWSDA, one would hope that the systems in place provide the necessary supervision to protect taxpayers' interests.

Traditionally, one of the mechanisms used by all organizations is to have travel expenses approved before or after the expenditure is made. In the case of SWSDA and the 147 pages of travel expense claims I've received from Mr. Anderson I was unable to discern any prior or post approval process, or validation of expenses claimed. Another method used is to require "evidence" that the expenditure was made for the items claimed. That generally includes providing original and official receipts showing the payment made.

As an illustration I have copied my tab at the Triangle Ale House last week and included it in this posting. On the left is the real receipt.... and on the right is an invoice leading up to the receipt once I've paid and or had my credit card processed for payment.

The receipt on the left is the one that is generally required by organizations when approving claims for travel/entertainment expenses.... it is the proper receipt showing what the establishment received in payment for the tab. The one on the right is inadequate and would not generally be accepted by most organizations since it does not provide evidence of what was paid but solely of what was claimed as having been paid..... big difference! Click on it to enlarge and see for yourself!

So here's the question ..... if you were supervising someone who submitted travel and expense claims to you would you insist on the receipt on the left or the tab on the right? ..... If you were responsible for verifying expense claims within an organization, what would you feel comfortable relying on as evidence of what was actually paid?

..... So here's the problem.... as far as I can tell.... Mr. Anderson does not have anyone within SWSDA verifying and/or approving his expense claims..... or the justification of the expenditure. Moreover, by lumping in travel, conferences and meetings all together in the chart of accounts as SWSDA has done in its financial statements, it is impossible to manage expenditures for travel and entertainment against meaningful approved budgets.

Of the 147 pages of expense documentation provided some 115 are amalgams of chits of paper receipts and tabs provided by Mr. Anderson to support his claims. The actual claim on the monthly claims sheets provided by Mr. Anderson provide no detail beyond "See attached receipts".... and a total amount that is added to the claim..... no identification of the reasons for the supposed expenditure is provided. In providing these, Mr. Anderson and/or his solicitor copied these to sheets of paper. Below you will see an illustration of these typical "receipts" provided by Mr. Anderson when he files the expense claims he makes and approves for himself. Again, click on them to enlarge.

Could this be a problem?

LOOKS LIKE CHANGE IS COMNG.....

2009-06-02T15:28:00.004-03:00

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

AND... WILL IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

What happens to the stranglehold that Conservatives and Liberals have on local politics and power if one becomes a rump party and the other the Official Opposition.

Where will the power base be in Yarmouth and surrounding areas to bring about change... and of the old network... what I refer to as the "YARMOUTH BROTHERHOOD" (Cuz' ... there sure aren't (m)any Sisters involved)..... What becomes of them?

Anyone out there know?

Shelburne Park As it Was!

2009-06-02T13:02:00.002-03:00

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

For those of you who are interested in seeing what was sold by SWSDA for a reported $1 million plus a mortgage for $1.75 million here's a web site that provides a bit of detail.

http://www.targetnovascotia.com/IPPDF/ShelburneComPark.pdf

How its Done!

2009-06-02T06:35:00.013-03:00

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

Here's a Sample!

Below please find a copy of one of the cover sheets submitted as part of the 147 pages of travel and entertainment expense claims made to SWSDA by Mr. Anderson in FY 2005/2006. The blacked out portions were made by Mr. Anderson and/or his solicitor before the copies of Mr. Anderson's travel and entertainment expenses were provided to me. Just click on image to enlarge. Here are my questions:

1. Who approved this claim?
2. What currency was used?
3. What are notations about NSBI about?
4. Who was entertained, what was the purpose and what was accomplished?
5. Why is Pam's Room on here?
6. What are conversion rates if applicable?
7. What was daily meal allowance and how was it calculated?
8. Was daily meal allowance deducted from entertainment claims?

Just a few of the many.....

Got Questions? ...... Got Answers? ...... Got Comments?

Will it take a change in government?

2009-06-01T09:46:00.006-03:00

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

When Will Enough be Enough?

Now we know from these postings that :

A. Mr. Anderson's expense and entertainment claims raise a number of questions, especially respecting the estimated $32 Thousand dollars spent in just two watering holes in Yarmouth and another $20 or $25 Thousand dollars spent in the Triangle Ale House in Halifax over the years;

B. SWSDA's own audited financial statements indicate that SWSDA has spent some $2 million dollars on travel, meetings and conferences;

C. SWSDA has liquidated property in Shelburne in just nine months with a replacement value of $50 million;

D. SWSDA has received more than $4 million in cash, promissory notes and other assets as a result of their acquisition and sale of these two properties - just in the last couple of years;

E. SWSDA's Board has authorized the launching of a lawsuit against the Municipality of Shelburne for a reported $2.3 million; and,

MUCH MORE.....

Questions

Why..... has nothing been done to correct this situation?

Where .... do we turn to within government to straighten this out?

What..... needs to be done to make this organization accountable?

Who.... will assume responsibility and get the job done?

When.... can we expect appropriate action?

SWSDA Receives $3,925,000 Plus Interest From Shelburne!

2009-06-01T08:05:00.006-03:00

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

IN LESS THAN NINE MONTHS ---

MORE THAN $4 MILLION FROM SALE OF SHELBURNE ASSETS!

Today's posting will deal with the $1,175,000 in cash plus interest that SWSDA received from the sale of the Boys School....AND

The link with the $2,750,000 received in cash, promissory notes and assets from the sale of the Base

and what happened to that money......

Watch for it!

Last Week's Posting Re-Cap

2009-06-01T07:30:00.003-03:00

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

30 -PUNCHLINES - WEEK OF MAY 24 - MAY 31

To help readers manage the current volume of postings and get to the past stories they want to see I've begun a weekly re-cap of the previous week's postings. To get to any of these stories just click on the appropriate week identified on the left hand side of this blog and then scroll down.

1. "Snugs" and other Triangle Ale House Phenomena

2. Someone asked..... who's responsible about the threatened lawsuit of the Municipality of Shelburne by SWSDA for $2.3 million and the estimated $2o,000 in expense travel claims at the Triangle Ale House

3. Description of Triangle Ale House with photos and Mr. Anderson's travel and expense account there over the past decade

4. Following up... about coming article respecting Yarmouth Port Authority, Nova Scotia Association of Regional Development Authorities and Yarmouth Area Industiral Commission

5.Amazing Feedback about other organizations that the SWSDA Board and Frank Anderson are involved with

6. Nova Scotia Ombudsman investigates SWSDA

7.Psst.... did you hear about SWSDA Board Meeting

8. And the there's YARCO.. Anderson/Hurlburt land ownership partnership

9. Players look alike... about SCT story on YAIC

10. Someone asked about the South West Shore Volunteer Services organization

11. Consequences.... about accountability related to travel and entertainment expenses

12. Odd Expenses comment from Reader

13. Reply to comments I can't post....about failure of public officials

14.Just like Christmas... about waiting for SWSDA Board meeting results

15. Answers to comments about grounds for SWSDA lawsuit against Shelburne taxpayers

16. Looking for answers ... about Australian solutions to ensure accountability

17. For your information about SWSDA Accountability Readers

18. Odd Expenses.... bills that don;t seem to fit and Exhibitions accounts in SWSDA bills

19. Want to write... about addresses of SWSDA Board members

20. Almost forgot... about another law ignored.. RDAs owning property

21. A word of Caution... about reading list of projects SWSDA lists for themselves

22. No B.S. about anonymous reader who supports SWSDA

23. SWSDA project review... an opportunity for people to identify all the good things SWSDA has done for socio-economic development in our area.

24. Last chance... about contacting Board members to get views aired at SWSDA Board meeting

25. Economic Performance review.... about getting a copy

26. Depression is merely.... about likelihood that those responsible will do the right thing

27 SWSDA Meeting ... questions I'd like answered

28. Ask and ye shall receive... about a reader who wanted to re-read positive comments posted by another reader about SWSDA.. and all about B.S.

29. Those were the days... about travel and entertainment expense standards for promoting and working on development ... then and now

These are last week's punch lines.... and now this week's stories.... follow

Blog Organization

2009-06-01T01:56:00.002-03:00

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

Dear Reader...... In India they say that the best way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time. This blog has become a bit large and somewhat cumbersome.... and so I've re-organized the folders so that readers can get each week's postings on one page.

On the left hand side you will find weekly blogs that you can click on to read that particular week's articles and comments. The number of blogs that week also appears beside the weekly dates. Just click on the dates you want to read if you want to limit your reading to one week at a time.

Otherwise...... if you want to read the more than 100 postings to date just click on the 2009 button. ..... Hope this helps.

Questions You Were Afraid to Ask...

2009-05-31T18:05:00.007-03:00

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

WHAT IS NSARDA?

NSARDA is a provincial organization incorporated under the Societies Act in 1999. Its purpose in life is to protect and provide power to RDAs through collective lobbying of the Department of Economic Development.

NSARDA you could say..... "Rides Shotgun" for the RDAs.

It justifies the legitimacy of RDAs beyond each RDA's borders and gives them not just a regional power base, but also a Provincial one.... Clever, eh?!?

And all on your taxdollar-dime.....

Every RDA names two members to its Board and they have a full time staff...... at the present time Rod Rose and Frank Anderson represent SWSDA on the NSARDA Board. Pat Nickerson and I believe Paulette Scott have also been on the Board and Frank Anderson has been the Chair of NSARDA on more than one occasion for a number of years since 1999.

Like every other Society in Nova Scotia .... NSARDA is required to file annual financial statements to the Registry of Joint Stocks. Like SWSDA, NSARDA has failed to do so six of the nine years since its incorporation and as of this date has failed to file since 2007. Wow......!!

I think it really takes a lot of nerve for organizations like NSARDA and SWSDA to presume to advise communities and businesses about sound management when they can't even meet their basic regulatory obligations........

What do you think?

In the next few days I'll start reporting on this organization and its activities and role in the community development efforts of Nova Scotia communities .... don't miss it.

Two Million Reasons to ask Questions!

2009-05-31T12:48:00.006-03:00

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

Audited Financial Statements......

Incorporation under the Societies Act requires the annual provision of Financial Statements to the Registry of Joint Stock Companies (RJSC).

Between 1996 and 2008 SWSDA failed to meet this obligation. According to the RJSC record reviewed today...... SWSDA filed NO financial statements with the RJSC in 1997, 1998, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006 and 2007.... failing to file with the Registrar more than 50% of the time in the past thirteen years since their incorporation in 1995. During most of this time period, Rod Rose, Pat Nickerson, Paulette Scott and Roger King were the Chair or Co-Chair of SWSDA.

I have cobbled together a number of financial statements and modestly estimated expenditures for a couple missing years.

Here's what I get for expenditures attributed to travel, conferences and meetings for SWSDA.... not counting the last 14 months!

..... These numbers are from SWSDA's own audited figures!

1996 ....... $15,800
1997 ....... $41,378
1998 ....... $76,065
1999 ....... $104,103
2000 ....... $116,688
2001 ....... $118,022
2002* ....... $120,000
2003* ....... $122,000
2004 ....... $124,760
2005 ....... $137,626
2006 ....... $300,902
2007 ....... $339,670
2008 ....... $177,774

* (Estimated based on expenditures reported.)

TOTAL REPORTED EXPENDITURE BY SWSDA'S CEO, STAFF AND BOARD FOR TRAVEL, CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS OVER THE TIME PERIOD......

A WHOPPING.... $1,794,788

At that rate, when we include expenses for last fiscal year and the first two months of this year, SWSDA travel and entertainment expenses will, I expect, exceed $2,000,000 dollars!

Do you think it was worth it?

Think someone should ask for an audit of just this part of SWSDA's expenses?

Might Revenue Canada be interested? What is their tip line number?

Going to Find Out!

2009-05-31T08:30:00.003-03:00

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

Who are the mysterious employers....

And ..... why do they think they aren't obliged to tell us how much they pay SWSDA's CEO?

Let's think about this for a moment.

1. If part of Mr. Anderson's salary is paid for by a private benefactor, it seems to me that SWSDA should have an obligation to advise the public about who else pays his salary.

2. If part of Mr. Anderson's salary is paid for by an organization associated with one or more of the municipalities who already sit on SWSDA's Board, I would think that simple logic would suggest that the arrangement is at best in conflict and at worst inappropriate, particularly if the other municipalities on the SWSDA Board are kept in the dark about the "arrangement".
Soooo... this morning I submitted a FOIPOP application to Roger King who is Chair of the Yarmouth Area Industrial Commission. Here it is........

I wonder what the response will be........ any guesses?

What's the best case scenario you ask? They respond promptly and give me the information I've requested and citizen's are entitled to.

Worse case scenario?

Well ..... they can ignore my application or they can tell me to pound sand.... either way, I then have recourse to the Freedom of Information Office after 30 days or when they refuse. The FOIPOP Office will review the case, urge them to comply if they should or tell me YAIC is not subject to the FOIPOP Act.

Either way, the FOIPOP Office will make their recommendation to me and to YAIC. Should YAIC not comply, I can file an Appeal with the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. Then of course there is the Pre-hearing before a Judge where they will have to produce the documents that I've requested for the Court. At the pre-hearing, YAIC's lawyer(s) and I can agree on a schedule for producing Affidavits, Pre-hearing memos, etc. and a date for trial. Given normal delays, the case will likely not be heard until some time in 2010, summer or fall I expect. If I win, they have 30 days after the decision is rendered to appeal......

So.... it may take until 2011 to get this information. If YAIC insists on being obtuse they can go out and hire a lawyer or team of lawyers with its taxdollar-supported monies..... or they could give it to me next week. In any event, I'll be doing my own litigation if necessary!

Cost for me... mostly time and effort.... Value..... Priceless in a free country!