3/17/2010 11:24:00 AM 'City Hall has been a barrier to progress' Premier spells out criticisms as Corporation of Hamilton rolls out its own vision of reform
* Photo by Kageaki Smith. We want reform, not repeal, Corporation officials told the press yesterday.
Corporation: Here’s our vision of reform
The Corporation yesterday issued its suggestions for reform of city Government. The main points include:
* Expanding the right to vote in municipal elections to all Hamilton residents without regard to property ownership, family relationship or tax status;
* Simplifying voter registration by using the Parliamentary Register as proof of residence;
* Allow proxy voting when residents are not able to attend elections;
* Financial compensation for mayor and councillors to encourage people to run for office regardless of 'personal wealth';
* Expand the number of councillors to eight and move to a policy of majority rule;
* Expanding the city boundaries;
* Increased responsibility for public safety in the city;
* Increasing the amount the Corporation can borrow from $20 million to $50 million to help it cover the cost of capital projects.
There will be no progress on the development of the waterfront until the reform of the Corporation of Hamilton is complete.
Premier Dr Ewart Brown said the city government had dragged its feet on the remodelling of Front Street and the multi-million dollar project was now on the backburner.
The Premier told the Bermuda Sun he wanted to work with the Corporation and still envisioned the long-awaited development of Front Street as a joint venture.
But he insisted it would have to wait until the inquiry into the role of the municipalities was complete.
For his part, Mayor of Hamilton Charles Gosling said the city was involved in work to improve the waterfront and had been a leading contributor on an existing plan which includes a transport hub and a park.
He added that delays on development were due to economic constraints but he anticipated something could happen next year.
Premier Brown told us that the Corporation's belief that it would be abolished and have its assets transferred to Government as a result of the proposed reform was not justified.
"They have made a knee-jerk reaction based on the assumption that they will be less powerful," he said.
But he insisted the corporation was undemocratic and had been a barrier to progress on major issues, including the waterfront.
He said it needed to be reformed but was likely to still have a role to play in the future.
"I would imagine there will be some (role for the corporation), I just don't know.
"We are paying a lot of money for others to assist us with this work. I don't know what the corporation will look like, what its function will be. If I knew that I could save $800,000."
The Corporation meanwhile issued a list of its own suggestions for reform, including the expansion of voting rights and increasing some of its powers.
City officials said they had met with the legal team preparing the report on the municipalities. But they insist they will not share financial information unless they get some guarantees in return.
Expanding the franchise
"We need guarantees that we are going to have reform in terms of the expansion of the voting base, our assets and operations stay and that the councillors and the mayor will retain the power and autonomy they currently enjoy," said Mayor Charles Gosling.
The Premier said no commitments could be made.
"We've been trying to work with the corporation. We've had different levels of success at different times.
"I've gotten word that they have decided not to co-operate with the vendor doing this work for us unless they receive assurances that the Act will not be repealed... we can't do that."
Councillor Nicholas Swan said the corporation was currently on a 'war footing' in its dealings with Government.
"Any type of reform could come from an amendment to the existing Act. You don't need to repeal it to reform it. The fact that they are talking about repeal means we can't lull ourselves into a false sense of security. We have to be on a war footing."
The impasse is likely to delay any progress on the development of the waterfront, which requires the two bodies to work in cooperation. A Government green paper, earlier this month recommended a casino in Hamilton.
And former Premier Sir John Swan has been a vocal supporter of a casino as an 'economic engine' to drive the redevelopment of Front Street.
Dr Brown said he was not committed to a location (see separate story) but supports casinos for Bermuda.
Timothy Marshall, a lawyer acting on behalf of the corporation, suggested last week that casino profits could be the real motivation behind the reform plan for the corporations.
Dr Brown insisted: "I can't be responsible for what they are afraid of - the list could be so long."
But he struck a more conciliatory note, speaking of the corporation as a major player in the waterfront project.
"No matter how the corporation is formulated after the work it will still be a key element in determining what happens on the waterfront."
He added that the speed and efficiency of City Hall had improved since Mayor Gosling had taken office but not enough to stop reform from taking place.
Mayor Gosling said the battle was a 'single issue' dispute and insisted his administration was willing and able to work with Government on a number of issues, including the waterfront.
"We are ready to work with Government on reform of the municipalities once they clarify their aim is reform and not repeal," he added.
He said the corporation accepted the need for reform. But he said it did not accept the need to pay $800,000 to consultants to achieve that.
Posted: Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Comment by:
Scott
with the wreckless spending and lack of care for consequences of brown's so called "progress", im glad the corp is supposedly in their way, if that is the case. The corp knows its bad economic time to go spending on anything you want. thats why htey have a good budget!! govt should be learning, not repealing
