CoC Councillor expense reports Jan-Jun 2014

[speedog]

CoC Councillor expense reports Jan-Jun 2014 - link.

Who's the saints and who's not?

edit: To get around the Herald's subscription stuff...

Councillors each has an annual office budget of $177,150, which nobody ever fully spends. The overwhelming amount goes toward assistant salaries. It’s the other business expenses, capped at $14,000 a year, that are often more interesting to look at.

Here’s the expense reports for January to June 2014:

1) Ward Sutherland - $3,091

2) Joe Magliocca - $4,752

3) Jim Stevenson - $4,829

4) Sean Chu - $5,852

5) Ray Jones - $7,979

6) Richard Pootmans - $3,397

7) Druh Farrell - $3,910

8) Evan Woolley - $6,339

9) Gian-Carlo Carra - 4,494

10) Andre Chabot - $4,313

11) Brian Pincott - $9,296

12) Shane Keating - $12,033

13) Diane Colley-Urquhart - $4,644

14) Peter Demong - $6,469

[Amysicle]

.

[FraserB]

If you removed the stuff that he had to spend setting up a new office, he spent less than 11 other councilors. Don't really find anything wrong with that, considering his other expenses are on par with others in the same category.

[GTS4tw]

Maybe they are well paid because they can write a sentence in English, unlike whoever wrote the first line of that article.

Nothing crazy in the few I have looked in so far. Shane Keating needed the presidents box at the saddledome which cost over $1200, while others made use of cheaper boxes for around $600/game.

No crazy $1000 meals or golden toilets so far...

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by FraserB
If you removed the stuff that he had to spend setting up a new office, he spent less than 11 other councilors. Don't really find anything wrong with that, considering his other expenses are on par with others in the same category.

$400 lunch for 2 is legit on taxpayer's dime?

[speedog]

Re-arranged by amount spent - also added in how many terms each councilor has been in office plus whether or not they were a developer backed candidate in the 2013 election...

#1 - 12) Shane Keating - $12,033 (2 terms - developer backed)

#2 - 11) Brian Pincott - $9,296 (3 terms)

#3 - 5) Ray Jones - $7,979 (8 terms - developer backed)

#4 - 14) Peter Demong - $6,469 (2 terms - developer backed)

#5 - 8) Evan Woolley - $6,339 (1 term)

#6 - 4) Sean Chu - $5,852 (1 term - developer backed)

#7 - 3) Jim Stevenson - $4,829 (3 terms - developer backed)

#8 - 2) Joe Magliocca - $4,752 (1 term - developer backed)

#9 - 13) Diane Colley-Urquhart - $4,644 (6 terms - developer backed)

#10 - 9) Gian-Carlo Carra - 4,494 (2 terms)

#11 - 10) Andre Chabot - $4,313 (4 terms - developer backed)

#12 - 7) Druh Farrell - $3,910 (5 terms)

#13 - 6) Richard Pootmans - $3,397 (2 terms)

#14 - 1) Ward Sutherland - $3,091 (1 term )

For reference a - map of the developer backed candidates from the 2013 election (from this thread - link )...



so from the above info, I can't say that the length of a councillor's term makes a difference in how much their office spent in the first six months of 2014 but something else appears to float to the top a bit more than not

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Xtrema


$400 lunch for 2 is legit on taxpayer's dime?

He's not the only one who spent that kind of money on business hosting. There are a few other councilors who spent $1,000+ in that category. Probably should be more interested in who Keating spent $5,000+ with for "Special Projects".

[speedog]

So for Shane Keating (who was backed by the developer's association in the 2013 election), a $4,500 expense for a Special Project Contractor (Lori Masse ) who just happens to be a marketing manager for developer Qualico Communities.

Troubling or not?

[speedog]

Note that the developer backed councilors now control council with 8 of 15 seats (including the mayor's seat).

Yeah, yeah, I know there are those that will still debate this whole slate issue and in the end, we'll never know if being backed by a developer made a whole hill of beans difference in the 2013 election but if the developers intent was to gain control of council, then they have accomplished that. As a side point, I'd welcome anyone to bring information forward as to which candidates were union backed because there probably was such a slate in place.

Add into that the person Sean Keating hired as a Special Project Contractor and one has to ponder the optics of what may be going on - I guess a good question to ask is why Sean Keating needs a Special Project Contractor. Maybe something more needs to be discovered as to what this Special Project is -maybe it's really no big deal. Then again, do any of the other councilors have a Special Project Contractor?

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by speedog
Note that the developer backed councilors now control council with 8 of 15 seats (including the mayor's seat).

Yeah, yeah, I know there are those that will still debate this whole slate issue and in the end, we'll never know if being backed by a developer made a whole hill of beans difference in the 2013 election but if the developers intent was to gain control of council, then they have accomplished that. As a side point, I'd welcome anyone to bring information forward as to which candidates were union backed because there probably was such a slate in place.

Add into that the person Sean Keating hired as a Special Project Contractor and one has to ponder the optics of what may be going on - I guess a good question to ask is why Sean Keating needs a Special Project Contractor. Maybe something more needs to be discovered as to what this Special Project is -maybe it's really no big deal. Then again, do any of the other councilors have a Special Project Contractor?

The project was to write a communications manual for staff.

[speedog]

Originally posted by GTS4tw
The project was to write a communications manual for staff.

Which staff? If it was city hall staff in general or even the councilors, why would one councilor have to hire this Special Project Contractor? Why wouldn't it be just another contractor hired by the city.

GTS4tw - obviously you're aware of more of this Special Project Contractor situation than the rest of us and more details would be appreciated. The optics of whom was hired for this position, whom she was hired under plus her history (see her Twitter feed as well as her other job) just doesn't read well. If more details could be had, it might just prove to be not such a big deal - I would be more than welcome to be made to believe that there's really nothing going on but with what's on the table right now, it's difficult not to come to some other conclusion.

Lori's Twitter feed - link.

[Feruk]

Why are some of them making charitable donations with government funds? Seems to me that if they wanted to make a donation, maybe they should do it with their own money?

[Amysicle]

.

[mr2mike]

Just pointing out Druh Farrell expensed an Ipad as well she spends $247 a month on cellphone/telus related stuff.

[dirtsniffer]

14,000 a year isn't that much in the way of personal expenses.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Not a big deal if she is replacing a laptop with an ipad and uses it strictly for work.

As for the cell phone, she should probably look into getting a better plan to save tax payers some money. There is no reason she needs to be racking up 250$ a month when you can basically get unlimted everything for 100$ these days.

I'm thinking the Telus charges (which appear on all Councillors expenses) are for the office staff also. otherwise they are getting robbed.

[dirtsniffer]

pretty sure it would include their staff as well.

[phreezee]

Originally posted by GTS4tw
Maybe they are well paid because they can write a sentence in English, unlike whoever wrote the first line of that article.

No, I remember getting a campaign letter from fat Joe and it was so poorly written that I swore not to vote for the guy.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by mr2mike
Just pointing out Druh Farrell expensed an Ipad as well she spends $247 a month on cellphone/telus related stuff.

I could have an ipad at work if I wanted I think you guys are missing the fact that at the end of the day, when somebody expenses something, it still belongs to the company, not them. If someone needs an ipad to work with, why not? A laptop (bought through the government dell corporate purchasing program) would probably be $1k minimum. And rather than hassle a purchaser to do it for her, she just did it herself. Isn't that good?

Originally posted by dirtsniffer
14,000 a year isn't that much in the way of personal expenses.

No kidding. Shit, I hope you guys don't FOIP my ass... I'm all about proper accounting/expense practices, and I strongly disagree with $400 meal for two people (but it is completely reasonable for 5), but most of these expenses seem legit.

Even the espresso machine doesn't grind my gears. Just because you are a government employee doesn't mean you don't get perks.