Why am I feeling like this years budget feedback will be exactly like last years budget feedback? Last year, as you might recall, 100% of feedback submissions spoke out against the proposed budget, but council voted unaminously to approve the budget anyhow. The feedback appendix attached to this agenda is a sham. It does not contain any numbers. It hides the true nature of the feedback received by the district. It conceals how many people responded. It fails to give a true picture of what the taxpayers are saying, glossing over important issues, and only giving council the "facts" that staff wants council to see. It omits many comments from the electorate. Same as last year, I see this "feedback" exercise as a scam and a sham and an exercise in pulling the wool over the eyes of the voters. It'll be interesting to see what our council has to say regarding this "feedback" item on Tuesday's agenda. I don't expect that they'll say very much, since most of the facts seem to be kept hidden from them.
here's something that relates to the alleged "data science" that our council seems to think trumps common sense and empirical evidence. This includes the opinions and information of long term residents and knowledgeable individuals within the community.
'If you ask [a Machine Learning] system to predict who the police should arrest, it will suggest that they go and arrest people similar to the ones they’ve been arresting all along. As the Human Rights Data Analysis Group’s Patrick Ball puts it, “A predictive policing system doesn’t predict crime, it predicts policing.”
But there’s a difference between police rounding up the usual suspects on their own, and police doing so because an algorithm told them to: empiricism-washing makes bias seem objective because bias has been quantified. As Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez discovered in 2019 when she gave a Martin Luther King Day speech that described “algorithms” as racially biased, there is a substantial fraction of people who find this idea risible on its face, because they believe that “math can’t be racist.”
Empiricism-washing is the top ideological dirty trick of technocrats everywhere: they assert that the data “doesn’t lie,” and thus all policy prescriptions based on data can be divorced from “politics” and relegated to the realm of “evidence.” This sleight of hand pretends that data can tell you what a society wants or needs- when really, data (and its analysis or manipulation) helps you to get what you want.'
The feedback results being sent to council by staff, as I read the report,(Don't forget this is supposed to be about the "BUDGET"-- that's about money and taxes and spending) show that major concerns of the electorate include unleashed dogs, tree protection, culture, the environment and other political issues that have nothing to do with the municipal budget. Why is this information even included? When you're trying to balance your bank account, do you go off on some tangent about what paintings you might get for the living room?
I don't like the way that the feedback is presented. It doesn't show the facts. How many responses were in favor of a specific item? How many against? What alternatives were suggested?
What happened to suggestions about leasing, rather than purchasing, vehicles? What happened to suggestions of possibly selling surplus District lands? What happened to criticism of spending $13,000 to "refresh" the district logo? It looks like anything that might cut the "make work" projects of district staff has already gotten the axe, before council even sees it. And staff makes sure that council doesn't ever get to see it.
There are deep concerns expressed in the community about the $448,000 proposed budget of bylaw enforcement. But the report conceals this feedback and, instead, is focused on things that bylaw enforcement "needs" to get involved with, not on reducing that huge expense to the taxpayer.
There's too many employees in the district office, and unless they can somehow perpetuate their "make work" projects, there's no reason for them to be there. I say that someone needs to thin the herd. Too many snouts in the trough.
Here's what I saw. November 2019, there was a water main break on Campbell St., across from the Co-Op gas bar.
Public works budget includes, I believe, $70,000 for a backhoe, and I see then driving around in a shiny new dump-truck that must have cost about the same.
Gibson Bros. Contracting showed up promptly, dug up the pipe, fixed the leak, and put it all back to right, the same day. I'll guess that their invoice was far less than $3K.
Why is the taxpayer spending $150K on equipment that no one at public works knows how to use? or doesn't want to use? The job can be done for far less by using a private contractor, who knows what he's doing and does the job correctly?
I’ve had letters sent to council in the past filtered out as well. Not sure if it was office staff or the mayor who decided they would not make the agendas. They can always say they arrived late after being lost at a desk or computer. The system is rigged to give lip service to following the rules for public input while ignoring it at the same time.
this whole process of government is a farce exemplified by the elected asking for input and feedback then ignoring anything what would contradict their holy data. they do what they feel like despite experience and common sense of the residents telling them about reality. we have to pay for the nonsense so we would like a reasonable answer as to why the districts logo costs $13,000. to 'refresh'...for example....cant the school children give us a wealth of new ideas for this? why not?
This is a copy/paste from the DOT 2019-22 Strategic Plan: Strategic Priorities (High) Key Actions > Conduct a review of services delivered, including priorities, cost reduction opportunities and increased revenue potential.
Ok, that sounds great! Have you seen anything mentioned in the 2020 Budget that even remotely looks like someone is following up on these lofty ideals? The answer is "NO"! The budget is all about ways to spend, spend and spend.
9 comments:
Why am I feeling like this years budget feedback will be exactly like last years budget feedback? Last year, as you might recall, 100% of feedback submissions spoke out against the proposed budget, but council voted unaminously to approve the budget anyhow.
The feedback appendix attached to this agenda is a sham. It does not contain any numbers. It hides the true nature of the feedback received by the district. It conceals how many people responded. It fails to give a true picture of what the taxpayers are saying, glossing over important issues, and only giving council the "facts" that staff wants council to see. It omits many comments from the electorate.
Same as last year, I see this "feedback" exercise as a scam and a sham and an exercise in pulling the wool over the eyes of the voters.
It'll be interesting to see what our council has to say regarding this "feedback" item on Tuesday's agenda. I don't expect that they'll say very much, since most of the facts seem to be kept hidden from them.
I wonder where the letters that were sent in as feedback went? Looks like the roundfile.
here's something that relates to the alleged "data science" that our council seems to think trumps common sense and empirical evidence.
This includes the opinions and information of long term residents and knowledgeable individuals within the community.
'If you ask [a Machine Learning] system to predict who the police should arrest, it will suggest that they go and arrest people similar to the ones they’ve been arresting all along. As the Human Rights Data Analysis Group’s Patrick Ball puts it, “A predictive policing system doesn’t predict crime, it predicts policing.”
But there’s a difference between police rounding up the usual suspects on their own, and police doing so because an algorithm told them to: empiricism-washing makes bias seem objective because bias has been quantified. As Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez discovered in 2019 when she gave a Martin Luther King Day speech that described “algorithms” as racially biased, there is a substantial fraction of people who find this idea risible on its face, because they believe that “math can’t be racist.”
Empiricism-washing is the top ideological dirty trick of technocrats everywhere: they assert that the data “doesn’t lie,” and thus all policy prescriptions based on data can be divorced from “politics” and relegated to the realm of “evidence.” This sleight of hand pretends that data can tell you what a society wants or needs- when really, data (and its analysis or manipulation) helps you to get what you want.'
The feedback results being sent to council by staff, as I read the report,(Don't forget this is supposed to be about the "BUDGET"-- that's about money and taxes and spending) show that major concerns of the electorate include unleashed dogs, tree protection, culture, the environment and other political issues that have nothing to do with the municipal budget. Why is this information even included? When you're trying to balance your bank account, do you go off on some tangent about what paintings you might get for the living room?
I don't like the way that the feedback is presented. It doesn't show the facts. How many responses were in favor of a specific item? How many against? What alternatives were suggested?
What happened to suggestions about leasing, rather than purchasing, vehicles?
What happened to suggestions of possibly selling surplus District lands?
What happened to criticism of spending $13,000 to "refresh" the district logo?
It looks like anything that might cut the "make work" projects of district staff has already gotten the axe, before council even sees it. And staff makes sure that council doesn't ever get to see it.
There are deep concerns expressed in the community about the $448,000 proposed budget of bylaw enforcement. But the report conceals this feedback and, instead, is focused on things that bylaw enforcement "needs" to get involved with, not on reducing that huge expense to the taxpayer.
There's too many employees in the district office, and unless they can somehow perpetuate their "make work" projects, there's no reason for them to be there. I say that someone needs to thin the herd. Too many snouts in the trough.
Here's what I saw.
November 2019, there was a water main break on Campbell St., across from the Co-Op gas bar.
Public works budget includes, I believe, $70,000 for a backhoe, and I see then driving around in a shiny new dump-truck that must have cost about the same.
Gibson Bros. Contracting showed up promptly, dug up the pipe, fixed the leak, and put it all back to right, the same day. I'll guess that their invoice was far less than $3K.
Why is the taxpayer spending $150K on equipment that no one at public works knows how to use? or doesn't want to use? The job can be done for far less by using a private contractor, who knows what he's doing and does the job correctly?
Go round the filter. Send your comments directly to Mayor and Council
I’ve had letters sent to council in the past filtered out as well. Not sure if it was office staff or the mayor who decided they would not make the agendas. They can always say they arrived late after being lost at a desk or computer. The system is rigged to give lip service to following the rules for public input while ignoring it at the same time.
this whole process of government is a farce exemplified by the elected asking for input and feedback then ignoring anything what would contradict their holy data. they do what they feel like despite experience and common sense of the residents telling them about reality. we have to pay for the nonsense so we would like a reasonable answer as to why the districts logo costs $13,000. to 'refresh'...for example....cant the school children give us a wealth of new ideas for this?
why not?
This is a copy/paste from the DOT 2019-22 Strategic Plan: Strategic Priorities (High) Key Actions
> Conduct a review of services delivered,
including priorities, cost reduction
opportunities and increased revenue
potential.
Ok, that sounds great!
Have you seen anything mentioned in the 2020 Budget that even remotely looks like someone is following up on these lofty ideals?
The answer is "NO"! The budget is all about ways to spend, spend and spend.
Post a Comment