Scoop pointed this out to me in the comment section of my last post this morning. It is from a very interesting article that he wrote in the EB about the towns debt situation back in February 2010 as follows:
The following is a quote from Ian Chadwick from that article:
Everyone around the table is concerned about the town’s debt level, says Councillor Ian Chadwick.
However, he noted a “good chunk” that had been spent on sewer and water work will come from user fees.
“It looks worse than it really is, because it’s not all on the taxpayers’ burden,” he said.
Chadwick noted it becomes a balance between what people are willing to pay in property taxes, and providing the services that taxpayers demand.
“Everyone says to keep taxes low, but don’t cut whatever my favourite service… or what my kids are involved in,” he said. “It comes down to where to we cut. How much are people willing to pay, and how much are we willing to cut.”
He said many of the capital projects the town is spending money on are “inescapable,” such as sewer work.
“The simplistic attitude I hear is that we just don’t spend money,” he said. “But every year, the costs go up.”
And every year, infrastructure gets older ; some of the sewer work, for instance, is to replace pipes that are nearly 100 years old.
“There’s not a simple, straightforward answer. We’re not going to get out of debt unless we stop everything we do,” he said. “It’s about keeping our debt manageable.”
I actually completely agree with Mr. Chadwick in his above statements. But what I do find quite nauseating ladies and gentleman, is during this election campaign he talks about the previous debt position left by the previous town council, like he had nothing to do with any of it. Also if you note above, it seems that he was in full agreement of that town councils spending and was not dragged along for the ride, kicking and screaming as he has often liked to pontificate on his Facebook page, during the all candidates meeting and apparently on the campaign trail.