|
|
Blog
|
|
Written by Alan Halberstadt
|
|
Wednesday, 03 March 2010 |
|
The last of my survey flyers on the $3-million request to City Council from the Hotel Dieu Hospital fund-raising foundation were delivered in Ward 3 last weekend, and the results are pretty well in. Constituents responded by mail, email and phone.
This is not a scientific survey, but it certainly sheds a blinding light on the mood of property taxpayers. For the most part they feel taxed to the hilt, and not disposed to channel municipal taxes to hospital expansions and upgrades. A good number feel that donations to an obvious worthy cause should be a personal choice, not a conscripted one.
Of those who have responded as of March 2nd, 79.6 percent voted NO, and 20.4 percent voted YES.
I also conducted an on-line poll, restricted to Ward 3 residents based on their postal codes. That result was closer, bumping the YES vote up to 23.5 percent versus 76.5 percent for the naysayers.
I have gathered a fairly representative group of opinions on the issue for this posting. I did not attach full names to the comments below since respondents were not asked for their approval to share their opinions on-line. None of the ratepayers below replied anonymously to me, however, so I swear by their authenticity:
While I work at a hospital, I know the need for money. However, it is provincial and federal responsibility to fund, not city. While $10 to $15 isn’t much the principal tells me that we shouldn’t do it. I believe the county has decided to go ahead with this, but my attitude is they already use multiple city-funded projects without paying for them in their taxes, so good for them to fund this!
Gail
* * *
I vote yes to city council giving 3 million dollars to HDGH for expansion and improvements. The following are the reasons why:
1) For nearly 2 months , I have been at HDGH almost every day, 40 hrs per week. I am there in the capacity as a DSW for Community Living Essex County, my employer. We are there to give support to an individual who is in our care. The care and professional attitude of all staff at HDGH towards the individual we support, myself and my co-workers has just been outstanding.
2) So I feel that any expansion for HDGH is an asset for all of the community of Windsor and Essex County and should be supported.
3) I do think our health care is second to none and I celebrate this fact every day.
4) I do understand that the more we take on at a community level the more the Province of Ontario may try to push on us! But if that time comes we have the choice to say yes or no, I would hope.
5) I am a property owner, with one income so pennies do count, believe me! I think I can take on a few extra dollars per year to help HDGH to provide even more of their excellent services, right here in my community. This may amount to the cost of a few coffees per month, so what!!
6) Please feel free to reply if I have missed the point of your memo, seeking taxpayers opinion.
* * *
Just my two cents worth in City Council’s commitment re property tax to assist the Foundation. I am against it. I feel the hospitals are provincially funded and I don't want this to become a precedent in fund-raising goals. The City is suffering enough with unemployment and doesn't need to be burdened further even though it is a good cause.
* * *
On Friday February 12 2010 I received in the mail a notice that the leaders of Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital Foundation will soon be asking Windsor City Council to donate $3 million of property tax money to its Beyond Medicine Campaign.
I completely agree with you that this is a worthwhile project but I have reservations about our property tax moneys going to fund this project. The economy is such that people are struggling to make ends meet and to keep their heads above water. People are not only losing their jobs but also their homes.
I feel that another raise in property tax will only make it harder and people who are already struggling. I don't like to stereotype people but there are some that this will not effect {the raising of their taxes), but for the vast majority it may mean the difference between losing their home or not.
Thank you for taking the time to read my opinion.
* * *
Regarding your request for opinions about the above noted subject, I wish to
submit the following:
I believe that YES, city council should commit property taxes to assist the
Foundation. Any improvements to local hospitals can only benefit the
citizens of this area.
* * *
I am a senior having difficulty paying all of my bills and my property taxes as it is, and while I sympathize with the hospital I agreed to it last time but cannot agree with it now I vote no
* * *
We cannot complain about our lack of health care facilities if we are not prepared to share the costs as a community. Windsor and its leaders have sorely lacked vision because t will not risk anything unless some other government body is paying for it. Hence, stagnation.
* * *
City Council should not commit property taxes to assist the Foundation in attaining its fund-raising goals. I am of the opinion that it is a personal decision whether or not to make a donation to this campaign.
* * *
Hi Al:
I am sure that it is a worthy project. However, since they have already received $5.3 million from private donors, I see no reason why they cannot pursue, from the same or other donors, the additional $3-million they are requesting from Windsor Council. Unless they can guarantee the taxpayers a less than 5 hour wait in the emergency room, I'm afraid my answer is No. Since there are 4 taxpayers living in this residence, they all agree. That comes to 4 No's.
* * *
My wife and I have discussed this question about HDGH requesting $3-million from the City.
We agree that the city should not agree with this request. This will set a precedent for other major fundraising groups - and especially WRH if they decide to expand.
In addition, aren't we already paying a special health care levy to the provincial government so that they can provide appropriate health care?
Thank you for asking our opinion.
* * *
Thank you very much for soliciting my opinion in regards to the Hotel Dieu funding proposal. I strongly urge you that City Council should NOT assist the Hotel Dieu Grace Hospital Foundation's proposal.
As you said in your letter, no doubt this is a worthy project, however, where does it stop? I am being taxed out of my home. I am sure there are enough worthy projects that could easily be found to bankrupt every taxpayer in the city.
First, people in this city are losing their jobs and are stretched to the limit financially in many cases. Now is the time for fiscal restraint and responsibility. One only needs to look as far as the market value of homes in this city to understand
the economic situation locally.
| | This item includes 4 comments  |
|
|
Blog
|
|
Written by Alan Halberstadt
|
|
Thursday, 25 February 2010 |
|
A reader points out an obvious typo in my previous blog regarding employee absenteeism at City Hall. In the 6th paragraph, the punctuation is erroneous. I need to supplant the commas with decimal points. Also, the absenteeism figures represent an average compilation of employees with sick days over four years – 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. There are no figures yet for 2009. The corrected paragraph should read as follows:
Over four years ending Jan. 1 2009, unionized outside workers averaged 99.905 hours of absenteeism per year. Inside union workers averaged 83.359 hours off the job, nurses 115.558 hours and firefighters 94,879 hours per employee. Significantly, non-union employees averaged 48,258 hours, less than half the average of outside workers and nurses and virtually half the number of hours off the job as firefighters. The overall average was 79.790 hours of absenteeism per employee per year.
I have now made the corrections in paragraph 6 below. Thank-you discerning reader.
| | This item includes 5 comments  |
|
|
Blog
|
|
Written by Alan Halberstadt
|
|
Tuesday, 23 February 2010 |
|
Long-lingering questions about absenteeism among City Councillors spilled into the public realm Monday when an in camera meeting scheduled for 3 p.m. was abandoned due to lack of a quorum.
It could have been even more embarrassing had Counc. Carolyn Postma not showed up for the regular public meeting at 6 p.m. As it was, Council barely had a quorum of six members and when two Councillors, Dave Brister and Fulvio Valentinis, declared conflict on one issue, the item was deferred at my urging. Only four Councillors remained to make a decision that could have a profound impact on the lives of citizens on Victoria Ave.
This is embarrassing, particularly in light of Council lip service that chronic absenteeism needs to be slayed at City Hall. You might remember that lamentable attendance rates (an average 39 unplanned absent days a year) among Provincial Offences Officers (POOs) recently prompted Council to move forward with the outsourcing of that service.
You might also recall that on January 5th, City Council unanimously directed administration to revamp its hapless corporate Attendance At Work Policy with the view of reducing absenteeism rates that are costing taxpayers over $4.1-million in lost productivity a year.
From January 2006 to June 2009, the corporate average of sick leave days per year was 9.56 days per employee.
Over four years ending Jan. 1 2009, unionized outside workers averaged 99.905 hours of absenteeism per year. Inside union workers averaged 83.359 hours off the job, nurses 115.558 hours and firefighters 94.879 hours per employee. Significantly, non-union employees averaged 48.258 hours, less than half the average of outside workers and nurses and virtually half the number of hours off the job as firefighters. The overall average was 79.790 hours of absenteeism per employee per year.
Admitting that the existing policy is ineffectual (it takes 30 months to fire an employee with chronic culpable absenteeism), administration promised to bring a revamped policy back in six months or so.
Perhaps in that time, the city can develop an attendance policy for City Councillors. Certainly it is an unrealistic expectation that Councillors should have perfect attendance, never get sick and never go on vacation. It is, however, a dereliction of duty when consistent patterns of absenteeism emerge. You might remember Tom Wilson’s attendance issues became very public four years ago as he served the final year of his long City Council career.
At the very least, any future attendance policy should direct Council Services to report on the Council agenda the attendance of Councillors at in camera, regular public meetings and special meetings either quarterly or semi-annually. Attendance at committee meetings could also be aired since it is my experience that the attendance record of some Councillors is much better than others when it comes to these duties.
I heard this morning that AM800 Radio put out a phone survey this morning asking listeners if Councillors should be docked pay for missed meetings. I will be interested in the result of that poll when it is announced tomorrow.
I have spoken to Counc. Ron Jones about sponsoring a notice of motion to establish an attendance policy for City Councillors. He agreed, so we shall see what we shall see. | | This item includes 6 comments  |
|
| |
|