Tag Archives: City of Nanaimo

Nanaimo Council gallery drama over Glen Oaks Drive

At the Nanaimo Council meeting on Monday there was a delegation seeking approval for a development variance at 3795 Glen Oaks Drive. The agenda item was brought forward by Mayor McKay. Some members of the gallery objected to the presentation by the builder and his consultant. It was the builder’s second attempt at getting a development variance for this same property in a month. Normally, builders must follow a re-application process which takes 6 months.

The meeting was shut down after people in the gallery shouted out some objections and called a point of order. Mayor McKay said that security would be called to remove some members of the gallery. After the meeting was shut down it started up again and then Councillor Fuller asked if the Mayor could be removed. City staff read out some bylaws and that seemed to be the end of it.

Builder wants two driveways

Glen Oaks Drive in Linley Valley was built in 2012. The original subdivision developer designed Glen Oaks Drive with specific driveway locations for each parcel. This was because the City wanted to try and ensure there was enough on-street parking because the road is extra narrow and on a steep slope.

Glen Oaks Drive Nanaimo
Glen Oaks Drive Nanaimo

At 3795 Glen Oaks Drive, the builder has built two houses on one parcel. The problem is there is only one driveway. Now the builder wants two driveways.

The City has said no. How does the builder get around this problem? Does he contact the Mayor, to whom he contributed to his election campaign? Could the Mayor then see to it that the builder’s re-application is added to the Council agenda?

The builder and his consultant came up to speak to council. They were reminded by Councillor Fuller and Hong that there is an established re-application process and why don’t they follow it like everyone else?

Councillor Brennan commented that the two homes have already been built on the lot so why “punish” the builder; implying the discussion was moot. Councillor Pratt echoed Brennan’s opinion.

Then Councillor Fuller countered with the point that the builder has to go through the proper steps just like everyone else. Councillor Fuller added that if everyone did what the builder was doing, they would have people coming back to every Council meeting with special requests, and it would set a very poor precedent.

Councillor Thorpe said that he could not go along with the builder’s request.  It is interesting to note that in a previous presentation to council for another property variance, the consultant made a point of saying he was a friend of Thorpe’s.

Conflict of Interest

After the builder’s presentation, there were two speakers who spoke about concerns they had with conflict of interest and favouritism as the builder had contributed two percent to the Mayor’s election campaign. Mayor McKay commented that it wasn’t much money.

The vote was Mayor McKay, Councillor Pratt, Brennan in favour of the re-application and
Councillor Hong, Fuller, Thorpe, Kipp voted against. Councillor Yoachim was absent.

Lack of updated building plans and photos

The City of Nanaimo is very lax in updating their building plans and providing Council with updated photographs of building sites.

As an example, Council was shown a picture of a tree-filled lot. The site doesn’t look anything like this now. So why wouldn’t the City provide Council with current photos?

Also, builders in Nanaimo construct first and then get variance approvals later. The situation at Glen Oaks Drive is a good example of what goes on in the rest of the City of Nanaimo.

The planning department doesn’t update their maps with what was actually constructed. Isn’t this unsafe for the fire department? On the map it might say there is one house and there are two houses and two carriage houses.

The City of Nanaimo is very lax when it comes to tree removal as well. There is no protection for urban trees. When builders infill large lots, all the trees are removed from property line to property line; there is no requirement for a setback.

Trees = wealth

Has the builder planted trees elsewhere to make up for all the trees that have been removed? The City has no plans for a tree bank and there are few if any pocket parks for neighbourhoods. This leads to ghettoization of neighbourhoods.

Research published a few years ago shows a tight correlation between per capita income and forest cover.  The researchers found that wealthier cities can afford more trees, both on private and public property. The well-to-do can afford larger lots, which in turn can support more trees.

Mayor McKay frequently advocates for small-lot developments. Is this something we want—cookie-cutter houses on denuded lots? Without proper planning, Nanaimo will soon lose its appeal.

West Vancouver just had a major flood which could have been mitigated by protecting tree cover. When lots are bare of trees then storm sewers will get more runoff and floods occur.

Colliery Dams Cost Plus Contract

Nanaimo council met on Wednesday, September 2nd to vote on the Colliery Dams contract to Copcan Civil Ltd. for the construction of an auxiliary spillway at the Lower Colliery Dam.

Nanaimo council voted in favour of the above motion with no changes. Councillors Bestwick, Brennan, Pratt and Thorpe and Mayor McKay voted in favour. Councillors Kipp, Fuller and Hong voted against. Councillor Yoachim was absent.

The following are highlights from the meeting:

Two delegations spoke:

Delegation 1: …why do we have 9 or 10 law enforcement officers present for this council meeting today? …we have over 100 day time break and enters … Has the city ever entered into any cost plus contracts?

Mayor: you can’t ask questions … get on with it…

Delegation 1: …there are a lot of things still up in the air…only 30% of drawings have been completed… we don’t have enough details…in order to award the contract today… we need more details…this is an open ended cheque book…

Delegation 2: I regret the money this is costing taxpayers…we risk losing our water rights…we should be focused on unemployment…I worked for Ontario Hydro…a sealed tender doesn’t guarantee anything.

Discussion followed:

Bestwick: as we all know and understand…this council unanimously voted to repair the spillway…the award of this contract is a cost plus or open ended…but because of the time constraints … which we will not meet…I am on record of not supporting this …we voted to put the spillway in the least non-invasive way…so it all comes down to balance…my concern now is to get the job done … in the least invasive way…the BC government is forcing this on our council…I know Copcan is on a cost plus contract… I hope there will more details on this…

Bestwick: … [makes friendly amendment – that prior to onsite work beginning, Council be allowed to review plans and confirm it is the least invasive option]

Brennan: …that is not a friendly amendment to the motion…

Kipp: …nothing would be removed until the actual location is pinned down, is that the purpose of your motion, Bestwick?

Bestwick: yes … we are moving forward…we all know the spillway is moving east…I don’t want to get into a debate…we need to balance the alternative location

Kipp: …recommendations came from Colliery Dam committee but there was no quorum … I support Bestwick…I don’t want the project started without plans…

Fuller: I voted against the cost plus contract … I like Bestwick’s motion … I can see it working…we’ve agreed to do something…To remove trees before we know where this is going is ludicrous…

Swabey: …we know were it’s going…based on Council’s decision…alternative locations possible for spillway…we don’t have all the details…we will not meet the deadline of the province…

Hong: ….is there a plan of what trees will be removed?… It’s still in limbo…

Swabey: … we do know where the location of the spillway would be…it would cost $300,000 to $500,000 to get drawings for the tree removal, if we get drawings…

Hong: …what stage are we at with the drawings?… when can Copcan start work?…

Staff: September 15th.

Hong: …what percentage of the drawings are done?

Swabey: …Golder is still working on the drawings and probably won’t be finished until October…four to six weeks…

Fuller: ‘we won’t meet the deadline’ is now my favourite saying from Staff. This keeps getting more interesting…we can be assured we won’t meet the deadlines…we haven’t met the deadlines already. September 1st has come and gone. If we approve the motion as it stands…the work would start immediately. If we approve [Bestwick’s amendment]… this could take more time …it could cost $300K and it could also cost less too…nothing has been set in stone…I will vote to support [Bestwick’s] amendment.

Councillor Kipp: This is a city park and yet Parks and Rec are not involved…

Kipp: …who is preparing the drawings, Herold [Engineers]…this rush to get [Copcan] started … Copcan had to have this special meeting today…we are facilitating the comptroller’s request to get going…It’s September 2nd and we haven’t seen any more drawings from Golder…Copcan will get the contract…they are hiring people for landscaping and tree experts yet we have City Staff we are not using…the process seems odd…we have had so many delays…Before staff didn’t care about water rights now they do…the people asks questions we don’t answer…tearing apart the park…What’s the final location of spillway?….we don’t even know the soil construction…

Mayor: calls question on Bestwick’s friendly amendment

Councillors Hong, Kipp, Fuller voted in favour of Bestwick’s motion. Councillors Bestwick, Brennen, Pratt, Thorpe and Mayor Mckay opposed. Bestwick votes against his own motion.

Bestwick continues to ask questions about the proposed location of the auxiliary spillway.

Bestwick: …I am concerned that without the specific details we don’t know things…many people said the dams were fine [including Mayor Mckay]… Do we need to proceed with the project?… I don’t like the project going forward in its current form…We will find ourselves in another conundrum…I am going to vote in favour of Copcan getting the contract…I am going to put all my faith in them…if one tree is saved great… leave it up to the professionals…

Fuller: ….Concillor Kipp received a letter…we have nothing…we don’t have details… there is nothing written in stone on this project…

Kipp: …has the City ever awarded a cost plus contract without detailed drawings?

Swabey: No, but the RDN did just recently with the outfall contract.

Kipp: I voted for that because it was an emergency… Are we charging any late charges on this?

Swabey: There will be no late charges if deadlines are missed.

Kipp: …What is our riparian action on this?

Swabey: We will address it when it comes up.

Kipp: …the dams needed to be monitored from the beginning … the water flow levels… I can’t support this cost plus project…

Hong: …will the trees be saved?…I don’t have a problem with awarding the contract…I can’t vote for this … they [Copcan] don’t need to start right away… Bestwick’s motion was going to give us some assurance of finding the best pathway for the spillway…is this the best option to take?…I would love to save the trees…we need to feel warm and fuzzy inside about this…show us what you can do to save these trees. We need some assurances…I would like to know what trees are going to be removed…let the people know as well…

Bestwick: When this specific location was chosen…what other options did Golder & Herold work on?…

Staff: …three other design types were presented…

Bestwick: …my question wasn’t answered… the site of the spillway? …did we define the [exact] location…not what type of spillway…you didn’t answer my question…we didn’t have any option before this nothing…

Swabey: …we don’t have time to do anything…we just relied on Golder…we don’t have time…

Bestwick: …rocks to be removed…the pinning of the concrete…slope…trees…removed…the shortest route might not be the best…

Swabey: … it costs $20,000 to drill a day….we don’t have the time ….this is the route chosen

Bestwick: …the deadline is a mystery to me…it’s not going to be [completed in time]

Pratt: Call the question

Fuller: …if this motion is defeated…I will make a new motion…fight ’til we die….

Hong: … I don’t have a problem with awarding the contract… Bestwick’s amendment was good…

Kipp: …what is ‘substantial completion’? Is it up to the comptroller?

Swabey: …we have to work with the province…

Pratt: Call the question

Bestwick: has Golder or Herold submitted design drawings with locations for the spillway?

Mayor calls the question to award Copcan Civil Ltd the contract for the Colliery Dams remediation project.

Councillors Bestwick, Brennan, Pratt and Thorpe and Mayor McKay voted in favour. Councillors Kipp, Fuller and Hong voted against.

Kipp: I want off the Colliery Dam Select Committee [it’s a farce].

Fuller: makes a motion to disband the Colliery Dams committee. All voted in favour.

How can the City of Nanaimo blindly enter a cost-plus contract with no strings attached? The contractor can take as long as they like while the Nanaimo taxpayers are paying through the nose.

Colliery Dams: Political Theatre in Nanaimo

Colliery Dams was on the agenda for the Monday July 20th Nanaimo council meeting. There were 4 delegations who came to speak.

Councillor Yoachim raised his motion for the dams which was legally drafted and all encompassing. Here are the highlights of the motion:

  • select the Lower Dam remediation option: Auxiliary Spillway (Labyrinth/Box Culvert, Open Channel  alternative)
  • prepare a design report and construction plan for the Auxiliary Spillway on or before July 24, 2015
  • prepare a conceptual plan for the Middle Colliery Dam for potential use once the Lower Dam remediation is complete
  • develop Terms of Reference for a tendering process for the Auxiliary spillway to be awarded by September 1, 2015
  • re-establish the Technical Committee as a Select Committee
  • have an independent investigation and report on the Colliery Dam process from start to finish
  • send a letter to the Provincial government outlining concerns with the process
  • stop all legal proceedings before the Environmental Appeal Board

Four people spoke about their concerns about all of the unanswered questions around Colliery Dams. MLA Routley spoke about his concerns that the Colliery Dams debacle was dividing council and the community and further work could be done with the province.

Councillor Brennan started off by saying she didn’t know how to properly address Routley. Next she told him he had incorrect facts. Brennan claimed that the Colliery Dams remediation cost was not originally estimated at $30 million. Was she saying that the Nanaimo Daily News got their facts wrong as well? Then Brennan invited Routley to have a meeting with herself and a city staff member at which time the “facts could be clarified.” MLA Routley  acknowledged a difference in opinion.

No other councillors nor the Mayor had any questions or comments. Councillors Yoachim and Bestwick thanked MLA Routley for his time coming to the meeting.

Councillor Brennan made a motion to have a 15 minute break so all councillors could look at Yoachim’s motion, as it was the first time they were seeing this “very long motion full of legal speak.”

After the break, the meeting resumed. Councillor Yoachim exited the meeting several times as did other councillors and staff. Apparently, they were ironing out the details of the motion.

A dysfunctional council no more?

The Nanaimo Mayor hired The Integrity Group run by Vancouver lawyer Heather MacKenzie for $50,000 to help council get along.  According to the News Bulletin, the Mayor commented that the division and behaviour is much worse than most councils, morale is at an “all time low” at City Hall and the “business of the city is not getting done.”

Ever since the election last year, the Nanaimo Council was in a stalemate position about the Colliery Dams. Five councillors would not agree with the other three and the mayor on what to do.

The threat was that if council didn’t fix the dams Nanaimo would be fined a $1 million a day by the province.

Previously, the five councillors had complained that the Mayor and three councillors were not interested in going to talk to the provincial government. The five councillors spoke of the whole process as being a complete sham.

Why didn’t  the entire council meet with the provincial government and ask for financial help? Only the five councillors met with the Deputy Minister who oversees the Dam Safety Section. Mayor McKay would not give his endorsement or participate in the meeting.

Council votes in harmony

At approximately 10:30pm Yoachim’s motion was raised again and it passed unanimously. All eight councillors and the mayor voted in favour of building the auxiliary spillway for approximately $5 million.

It was interesting to observe how happy Nanaimo Council was at the end of the meeting. It was as if everyone had won the lottery.  Councillor Bestwick, who was attending via phone link, commented “I don’t want to hold up the party” when he voted yes along with everyone else.

At question period a regular council watcher, who at previous meetings repeated a request to investigate the drain plugged with concrete, was laughing and joking with the Mayor.

What changed?

BC Government Exaction

If the province is insisting that the dams be fixed then why will they not help out the taxpayers of Nanaimo?

Councillor Brennan commented we own it so we fix it. If that is the case why were there no efforts to maintain Colliery Dams in the first place? Why such a waste of taxpayers money? Is someone looking for a lucrative contract?


This sounds like the last council when they said “sorry there is nothing we can do” we have to sell Nanaimo’s harbour.

It will be very interesting to see if the “Colliery Dams political theatre” is repeated with the upcoming incinerator planned for Duke Point.

Nanaimo waterworks supply agreement: serious concerns

Councillor Kipp really let it fly at the last Nanaimo council meeting when describing the City of Nanaimo’s exclusive five year waterworks supply agreement with Corix in Duncan which began in May 2010 and was extended. Kipp used words like ‘kickback’, ‘wrongdoing’ and ‘poor business practice’.

Councillors were to vote on accepting an updated report from KPMG regarding the value for money of the exclusive waterworks deal with Corix when troubling details emerged.

Kipp: “…I have concerns about freight charges which were not to be part of the original contract. As part of the contract Corix would cover the freight charges. So why did the City agree to pay $11,000 in freight charges then settle for a $5,000 discount? So the final freight bill was $6,800…This is a typical example of padding up costs, which is a real concern.

All throughout this contract there is a lack of a paper trail on returned or exchanged items. Right from the beginning the City knew there was a problem.”

In 2010, City Manager Kennings emailed Kipp regarding his concerns about the exclusive waterworks contract.  Kipp read Kenning’s email to council:

“I appreciate all your work on this pricing issue. We need to give them [Corix] a chance to give us their best price on everything we buy.  In my view we are a way bigger client than Cumberland and we should get a least as good a price as they do on everything. I don’t really feel sorry for Corix because they are the ones who are playing with pricing. I think that we should have to lock into large quantities because we know they are going to sell us lots of stuff, assuming they stock it and sell it. I am sure they want their special pricing deal to others to be a secret but the reality is that this stuff is out there. I expect you think I am being unreasonable and that I have a bone in my head about this. If we are not offered the same pricing as others this can make it difficult for us to have a long term relationship with Corix.”

Kipp: “When KPMG interviewed me they didn’t want any of the information I had. They went to Corix first before they talked to me [yet] who is the complainant. I sent in 13 pages to Mr. Gunn and not one of them made it into the report.  He could have cared less, I showed him invoices.  I talked to staff about these invoices as well, and they could care less about it. We have done nothing since 2010 about keeping a paper trail. Even Mr. Gunn’s first report said, there is a problem from ordering to delivery. That is the biggest thing with a purchase contract like this.

They call this an audit—it is not an audit. KPMG  didn’t take in all the concerns about pricing, inventory. We have worked on this for over three years to show pricing irregularities, this is SO disappointing.  I have asked questions and had no answers.

The original contract said that staff would have less work to do by going to one supplier.  Even in the report it talks about building up our inventory which we have talked about getting rid of.  This whole thing is so manipulated, it is almost corrupt.”

Bestwick:  “…as of April 2014 staff has come up with a scorecard to track inventory… KPMG noted a lack of a paper trail to track items going back and forth between the City and Corix. This has been going on far too long…Shame on us…. It took all this time to figure out that we need to have a performance evaluation process on this contentious contract. This was to save us time, money, and inventory.

I cannot be convinced with all of the information that we have that this was a good deal. I am extremely disappointed we extended it. Why did it take all this time to realize we don’t have a paper trail? Now four years later we have a scorecard system. …no paper trail, we don’t know the value of savings… I am extremely disappointed.”

McKay: “…  What can we do to give council confidence in this program that this is a good deal?”

Swabey: “So far the majority of council has confidence in this contract and the review.”

McKay: “We have one Council member [Kipp] who has stacks of information that this isn’t a good program. What can we do to assure him that we are listening to him? This won’t go away.”

Ruttan: “I am concerned, we all are, we have taken some action, it’s late but it’s there, the scorecard is established.  I don’t know what we can do? Obviously, we have to do something. I am concerned about KPMG, they are auditors and yet I am not sure the information we received was in a timely fashion and all the things that we could have gotten were in the report with Corix. I support this report but I would like some conditions on this… I am uncomfortable as well.”

Brennan: “…we all read the report and accepted it, we questioned him [KPMG auditor] on the report, everyone had the opportunity to ask questions… the report said it was a good contract and we got value for money… corrections were made…

If people [Kipp] are suggesting that there has been wrongdoing and he has information to back it up, the proper thing to do is go to the police station…. Report it to the authorities…the police should be the ones to review it…”

Kipp: “…this business is full of kickbacks if you really understood it, you get to see the price they offer you and they get a discount if you buy it and they sell more pipes then get a bigger discount.  It is all based on volume. If you understood the business, it’s not wrongdoing it’s poor business practice; it’s us signing up millions of dollars and not getting the best price…

When you say everyone read the report, I know not everyone read the report. One person saw someone passing notes saying that. So not everyone read it….

Wrongdoing would get me to say they got some hats and t-shirts or maybe someone is getting money. The invoices are there, I will give them to staff and they can audit them, we are getting different prices.

We don’t want to listen when the reports are bad. We just guestimate things, ‘maybe it’s $30 million maybe it’s not’. The guy [KPMG] even admitted that the savings were ‘anecdotal’. Lots of council bought into it.”

There were no comments or questions from Johnstone, Pattje, Anderson or Greves.

At question period the President of Four Star Waterworks raised the following points:

  • Why is the City giving all business to Corix, including deals not part of the contract?
  • Why didn’t they put the Protection Island and Harewood projects out to tender?
  • Why was KPMG not interested in hearing my concerns? I had pages of information.

Report Omissions 
In the KPMG audit they list the President of Four Star Waterworks and Councillor Kipp amongst the individuals interviewed for the audit.  However, KPMG did not address Kipp’s  13-page report nor the 3 years’ worth of analysis and spreadsheets submitted by Four Star in both the original and updated reports.

At the May 26th meeting Council voted to accept KPMG’s updated report.  Councillors Kipp, Bestwick, McKay and Anderson opposed and the balance were in favour including Mayor Ruttan.

Are sole sourcing contracts the best use of public funds? At the Charbonneau Commission in Quebec they have spent two years so far looking into corruption, which takes many forms especially with public contracts.

Yellow Flag Iris: Silent killer choking Buttertubs Marsh

As people walk around Buttertubs Marsh they often comment how beautiful the yellow flowers look in the marsh.

Yellow Flag Iris growing in Buttertub Marsh
Yellow Flag Iris growing in Buttertubs Marsh

Unfortunately, those flowers in the marsh are Yellow Flag Iris which is a non-native wetland plant. These plants have spread and threaten to choke out the entire marsh.

Why is the City of Nanaimo not removing the invasive Yellow Flag Iris from Buttertubs Marsh?

Something has to be done now before it’s too late!  The City of Nanaimo needs to act quickly to save this valuable wetland from this infestation.

May is ‘Invasive Plant Month’ and yet there is no mention of the Yellow Flag Iris on the city’s website.


yellow flag iris - invasive plant killing Buttertubs Marsh
Yellow Flag Iris – invasive plant killing Buttertubs Marsh

Facts about Yellow Flag Iris:

  • Their dense roots block water flow (flood issue)
  • Stem fragments can form new plants if they break off and drift to suitable habitat.
  • Toxic to humans and livestock
  • Yellow flag spreads by rhizomes and seeds. Up to several hundred flowering plants may be connected through underground stems.
  • Overwintering waterfowl depend on rush seeds as a high energy food source but the rushes are almost totally choked out.

This Saturday, May 31st from 12pm – 3:30 pm at the Bowen Park Wall Street parking lot, Nanaimo residents can drop off invasive plants they have removed from their yards at the ‘Drop Zone’.

Nanaimo taxpayers lose out with no bidding process

On Monday March 24, 2014 at the Nanaimo Council COW meeting there were concerns raised about the City of Nanaimo’s exclusive five year waterworks contract with Corix in Duncan; speakers raised alarms about a ‘no bidding process’.

Before May 2010, annual tenders for waterworks supplies were issued by product categories based on estimated volumes, and suppliers were selected on a ‘lowest unit price’ basis. For categories that were not tendered and for items not stocked in Central Stores, products were ‘spot bought’ by getting quotes from suppliers when they needed them.

Exclusive waterworks deal:

This all changed in May 2010 when the City Council voted to award a five year contract to Corix Water Products in Duncan.  At the time the contract was awarded, two other suppliers outlined their concerns that this exclusive contract with Corix was not a good deal for Nanaimo taxpayers.

KPMG report:

Four years into this contract the City requested a report from accounting firm KPMG to find out if this was a good deal. Unfortunately, the scope of the KPMG report was very limited. The audit looked at 30 invoices totalling $1,513,060 and gained responses from four out of fifteen staff members at the City of Nanaimo.

Of concern, the report by KPMG found that no formal performance management plan exists for the waterworks supply arrangement with Corix.  Data is not being collected for:

  • average monthly waterworks inventory
  • waterworks inventory turnover
  • order fulfilment errors
  • stock outages resulting from supplier failure
  • performance in supporting emergency product needs

Also, Corix failed to locate a warehouse yard in Nanaimo as proposed in their original submission.

Freedom of Information request reveals problems:

Before this exclusive contract was signed in 2010, Four Star Waterworks in Parksville was getting $250,000 in business from the City.  This all dried up; last year they lost their vendor status with the City and only received orders for a total of $738.

Using three years’ worth of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, Four Star Waterworks discovered that Corix billed Nanaimo taxpayers $4.8 million. In comparison, Four Star’s bid was $1.035 million for 3 years.

At the COW meeting last Monday, Four Star Waterworks raised the following concerns about the City’s exclusive contract with Corix:

  • 90% of City of Nanaimo waterworks purchases are with Corix
  • no paper trail on returns or items sent in error
  • unusually high number of items sent in error
  • Freight charges $6,800 paid by City (extra billing because of errors?)
  • no up-to-date inventory at the City of Nanaimo
  • all transactions are FOB destination freight prepaid, not the best for City
  • Harewood dam project: $322,000 spent on waterworks- no bids taken
  • Protection Island Project went to IWC Contracting – City had to purchase all waterworks materials that contractor needed, when there is a problem with waterworks – up to City to handle liability
  • Corix pricing ‘all over the map’; supposed to have one price list and 2% early payment discount
  • example: 30″ butterfly widget – one invoice charged $12,400 and another $900 less
  • example: 4 water meters purchased at $84 each;  600 @ $99 each; 12 @ $109 each (30% increase)

According to the speakers, the City’s no bidding process has cost Nanaimo taxpayers an estimated $3.76 million so far.

For those of you who are closely watching the Charbonneau Commission in Quebec you will recognize that corruption easily bores its way through when there is loose paperwork and invoicing and especially when there is no bidding process.

Why would staff recommend an exclusive agreement?

Councillor Mckay spoke in favour of the deal, Councillor Kipp was opposed, Councillors Bestwick and Johnstone had questions. Councillor Pattje asked if a three year contract would have been better. Mayor Ruttan asked the accountant if this was a good deal for Nanaimo. The remaining councillors had no questions or comments.