Onagawa Trucking Ltd

This post is an addition to the previous one - directly below. If you haven't read that - I suggest you do for what's what.

Mayor Dooley has consistently acted as (though not openly declared and not chosen by a majority) spokesperson for the relief-funding effort - the latest example on
http://hqkootenay.com
Money Always Headed To Onagawa: Mayor
Oct. 26, 2012
He does not defer to someone in charge. This in itself raises questions: like about possible - at least indirect - use of his authority to influenec in a Non-City-Hall matter.

This article once again with it's-always-been-Onagawa justification. Thus once again for me: Surely nobody would have objected to the money going there right after the disaster, if Onagawa had still been on the map, and if - to paraphrase the mayor - there had been someone to receive the money. That would have been humanitarian relief, based on immediate need. But while that not an option - with clear focus still - the next move then would have been: Ok, so let's get the money to where it will help OTHERS NOW! Pure motive. Done!

Deciding to instead sit on this money for over a year and a half to maybe buy something real nice like for some Onagawa sometime in the future erased the humanitarian-relief motive and replaced it with a calculated political intent. Come what may - literally: our Japanese are better than all other Japanese, are the only ones deserving of our largesse. I wonder how those in Onagawa would feel if they knew the City of Nelson's disdain for their fellow countrymen's needs!

I find Nelson's position morally repugnant!

Mayor Dooley frequently refers to an anonymously inclusive we this and we that within the funding-context, and it is crucial here to know: who are we?

1.
If we are the donating public: We have not been consulted by him or anyone else with any aspect of after-funding and subsequent application of the raised funds - like the Onagawa-only! angle and connected difficulties because of that all along - thus the use of we in this context would be totally inappropriate.

2.
If we are the so far only vaguely identified but clearly dysfunctional funding-distribution group - only recently prodded into action from/by the outside - and Mayor Dooley: there are two problems.
a.
The track-record of the group
b.
The mayor's aura of authority - pervasive in all this so far - is now beginning to more clearly manifest in all this at City Hall. Meaning: he does seem to be making decisions about this public-funding issue as mayor. Stating in The Nelson Daily, Oct. 18: the committee and the City now need to work out the details of the truck purchase. In Japan. From here an extraordinarily complex thus time-consuming undertaking.

The office of mayor does not carry authority to make unilateral decisions - concerning use of City Hall's time, energy, funds, manpower - for/in unapproved Non-City projects. Any proposals of that sort would need to be dealt with in an open Regular Council Meeting, to ultimately be approved by the City Manager for funding, etc. Yet approval of funding would be impossible, since nobody could know how much would be needed for this trucking process.
This is not Ford's Toronto! Or Harper's Ottawa! Yet!

So who are we?

Neither is Council authorized to approve the release of publicly owned funds - their exact amount STILL unknown to the donating public - as suggested by the Chief Financial Officer (CFO). This particularly in the - extremely negligent! - absence of any kind of document regarding the procedure of safekeeping, release and spending. The absence of such document should point towards particular sensitivity necessary with this issue. Otherwise: what will the neighbors say?!

Mayor Dooley's attempt to make decisions unilaterally - connecting a Non-City-Hall matter with City Hall - with the CFO willing to release publicly generated/owned funds in (big!) question to whomever on the mere say-so of Council - is at best unorthodox.

The mayor and Council already committed $10.000 of taxpayers' money to an unspecified scholarship - isn't that enough of a gesture at this point? It doesn't seem to be: now taxpayers are to fund establishment of a trucking-business (for profit?) in Onagawa. The truck itself paid for with said publicly generated/owned money - but this public not part of the decision-making.

Although several Council members expressed substantially differing opinions immediately after the Committee of the Whole (COW), Sep. 17 - none have stepped forward with a decisive opinion/decision since.

There has been no voluntary, comprehensive transparency in this affair for over a year: not from the City and not from the mythical committee; what the public has been shown recently is an unfocused reaction to one citizen's questions only, these taken-up by news media. Who can be held accountable is not clear - nobody seems to be there there - unless it is Mayor Dooley, the only person sort-of publicly defending Onagawa-Only now. Or is it we?  

As stated previously: the only acceptably neutral way to facilitate release and application of these funds now would be to - with support of Council - agree to forward them to a generally favorably recognized relief-organization, for application to all Japanese still in need in the earthquake/tsunami region - the most recognizable of such organizations being the Japanese Red Cross.

Onagawa Trucking LTD - Cheap Rates for WE!

Next Regular Council Meeting (RCM), Council Chambers, City Hall,

Mon. Nov. 5 - 19:00

Next COW Meeting, same location, 

Mon. Nov. 19 - 19:00

Both meetings are open to the public; the COW allows for direct public input. Agendas for both are available on the City's website - the Onagawa issue may be on that of the RCM. Check over the weekend.

.