Nanaimo City Staff Pattern?

---

1. In the past decade this city staff has overseen the tearing down of old buildings on Commercial St. to be replaced with a $100 million white elephant costing taxpayers at least $1 million per year. During that process they gave $3 million to a company which they could not collect when the company did not complete their part of the bargain.
2. They then saw to the destruction of the civic arena and in it's place stands a vacant lot, albeit a good looking vacant lot, but the arena was a much more practical use of the space.
3. They now want to tear down a perfectly good building which would cost less than $5 million to upgrade to provide earthquake protection in the event of the 'big' one hitting right under city hall. They would sooner spend $16 million on a bright shiny new office.

The top photo is the current city hall annex which an engineer's report estimates would cost less than $5 million to upgrade, staff would sooner tear it down and spend $16 million to build a shiny new office. They have convinced enough council members it is a wise use of YOUR tax dollars, which they have accumulated by OVER TAXING in previous years, and once again, your city council does whatever staff wants done.

The reason it would appear city staff prefers to fund such projects as the new annex by over taxation, is to avoid having to go to the public via referendum, which they probably think would be rejected by those who are actually stuck paying the bills.

It is the same management 'team' that recommended tearing down the civic arena at a cost of over $600,000 to accommodate the vacant lot that currently occupies the spot where the useful arena once stood.

Sadly, city council does not seem to have the fortitude or perhaps the understanding of such issues to challenge agendas put forward by city staff, who look to city council to put a rubber stamp on their decisions, so as to avoid being publicly accountable.

Personally after watching how the current management team at city hall oversaw the construction and current daily operating structure of the Conference Centre there is no reason to feel confident in their ability to assess property development and large construction projects. They are clearly out matched by those employed in the private sector.

An example taken from the current mad rush to spend $16 million on a shiny, new office is how the project has gone originally from costing less than $5 million to upgrade the exisiting faciltiy which was  compared to an estimate for new construction of $10 million to the current open ended contract which is said to cost $16 million.

This is the same management team that said a conference centre could be built for $12 million, then $18 million, then $52 million, then $72 million to what some say actually cost closer to $100 million, who have put in place a management contract to run the conference centre, which costs the taxpayers over $1 million per year.

Forgive me, if I have NO faith in their ability to oversee another multi-million contract to build a shiny new office, which city staff and city council KNEW would only fly if it were decided in secret behind closed doors!