PHA won the court case

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby CTF » Aug 13th, 2014, 11:06 am

As I have stated previously on this subject - funds raised through taxation should be controlled by the people we elect so they can be accountable for them.

In this situation we have the un-elected PHA now firmly in control of tourism tax revenue based on a decision from an un-elected judge. Meanwhile the Citizens of Penticton get to pay all of the bills - yes, I am not happy with this situation.


Tourism in Penticton is about more then the PHA - this was something the City was trying to rectify (admittedly the court case was the wrong way to do that) so now there is a mess and judging from the rather belligerent tone of the PHA in response this issue will not get resolved anytime soon.
CTF
Fledgling
 
Posts: 172
Likes: 23 posts
Liked in: 48 posts
Joined: Sep 21st, 2012, 11:58 am

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby fluffy » Aug 13th, 2014, 4:38 pm

I'm not convinced that the court action was misdirected. While the PHA may not have technically committed any breach of contract there are still plenty of questions unanswered as to both the quality and quantity of work they have performed to date.The City was asking these questions, and the PHA were not answering. It's my theory that they weren't answering because they realized that offering nothing but silence wouldn't be as bad as openly admitting that their efforts to promote tourism so far had been insufficient as well as ineffective. I think had it been my decision I would have been trying to show them the door as well.
Okey dokey doggie daddy.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 19424
Likes: 351 posts
Liked in: 4420 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby twobits » Aug 13th, 2014, 8:57 pm

fluffy wrote:I'm not convinced that the court action was misdirected. While the PHA may not have technically committed any breach of contract there are still plenty of questions unanswered as to both the quality and quantity of work they have performed to date.The City was asking these questions, and the PHA were not answering. It's my theory that they weren't answering because they realized that offering nothing but silence wouldn't be as bad as openly admitting that their efforts to promote tourism so far had been insufficient as well as ineffective. I think had it been my decision I would have been trying to show them the door as well.


Absolute ditto! This court case was only about material breach of contract. It takes a material breach to nullify a contract. Portions can be struck in a contract while leaving the intention of the contract whole. The city's mistake was their narrow focus.
I do not blame per se, the current council. Their skills are certainly wanting, however, they do rely on advice when it surpasses their skill set. Remember these are citizens that put their name forward for office. Would anyone of you take on this kind of possible lashback? Airchair experts all of us. I am more interested in how this decision of litigation came about. Who drove it? Was it the solicitors, Boyle and Co, or senior city staff that presented the "best approach to take". Cuz they F'ed up royally when they tried to prove a material breach when they should have been going after non performance imho.
There were no specified targets written into the contract as to spending obligations of funds, but for gods sake, you do not take almost 400k in tax revenue and not spend it for tourism promotion, without their being an implied understanding that that is what you will do with the funds. Did Boyle and Co prepare this contract? Did senior city staff sign off on the final draft?
Here is the catch 22. Do you appeal the decision on the basis of implied understanding, and they might just win, or do you take your licks and move on cuz an election is forthcoming?

PS- Look for David Prystay and Gord MaClaren on the ballot this fall. Pray I am wrong.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 7223
Likes: 1092 posts
Liked in: 3855 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 9:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby FSmith59 » Aug 14th, 2014, 12:25 am

All 3 of the above posts are exactly what I am talking about.

While the PHA won the court case, based on a grey issue in the contract, does not mean they have by any mean showed that they have been using the funds, for any good.

I do understand that our electoral system is different than our neighbours to the south. That said, I do believe we can force a vote on a "bill" that we bring forth to be voted on.

Obviously, any said bill will require a big petition of signatures to even be considered.

If you all agree that this decision was unfair, let's do something about it.

twobits, I agree with you that at least a few of these PHA members will run for council in the next election. And all based on the platform of how they beat the city.

I won't vote for any of them, if they run.
FSmith59
Banned
 
Posts: 385
Likes: 15 posts
Liked in: 93 posts
Joined: Jul 10th, 2013, 5:01 pm

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby fluffy » Aug 14th, 2014, 12:28 am

twobits wrote:There were no specified targets written into the contract as to spending obligations of funds, but for gods sake, you do not take almost 400k in tax revenue and not spend it for tourism promotion, without their being an implied understanding that that is what you will do with the funds.


Precisely. And just as important as the unspent funds is how they used the funds that were spent. One complaint of the City's was a lack of detailed accounting coming from the PHA. Anyone with a cynical streak towards the intricacies of small-town politics (like me) would instantly be asking what they are trying to hide. It's not really reasonable to think that a pack of accomplished business people wouldn't have knowledge of how to put a decent financial report together.
Okey dokey doggie daddy.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 19424
Likes: 351 posts
Liked in: 4420 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby mrmagoo » Aug 14th, 2014, 6:40 am

Colossal waste of money - $150000 in legal and how many staff hours? I read the decision and it appears to me that the evidence was not well prepared and the legal argument by the city could have been stronger - the judge pointed these shortcomings out. I don't understand the decision to litigate with the pha to start with - aren't these people supposed to work together? Why wasn't mediation the best option?
mrmagoo
Fledgling
 
Posts: 235
Likes: 20 posts
Liked in: 91 posts
Joined: Jul 26th, 2014, 9:35 am

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby XT225 » Aug 14th, 2014, 7:59 am

twobits wrote:PS- Look for David Prystay and Gord MaClaren on the ballot this fall. Pray I am wrong.


I've also heard that these two folks might run for council and so far they are the only ones that I would vote for. Great guys! This past term has been the least functional council that we have ever seen in this city. Out with the old and in with the new.
XT225
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2612
Likes: 863 posts
Liked in: 706 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby CTF » Aug 14th, 2014, 11:17 am

XT225 wrote:
I've also heard that these two folks might run for council and so far they are the only ones that I would vote for. Great guys! This past term has been the least functional council that we have ever seen in this city. Out with the old and in with the new.


A vote for Prystay is basically a vote for the PHA
CTF
Fledgling
 
Posts: 172
Likes: 23 posts
Liked in: 48 posts
Joined: Sep 21st, 2012, 11:58 am

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby livewire » Aug 14th, 2014, 11:40 am

A vote for Prystay is just that, a vote for Prystay. He's the most self serving individual I've met.

Remember folks.......he helped get the Penticton Business Development group together - they folded in part because it was more self serving for Mr. P to abandon that ship as he wouldn't have control - but he could control the PHA....
livewire
Fledgling
 
Posts: 312
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 22 posts
Joined: Nov 3rd, 2011, 3:01 pm

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby XT225 » Aug 14th, 2014, 11:47 am

CTF wrote:
A vote for Prystay is basically a vote for the PHA


Hey, thats fine and dandy. I would much rather choose the PHA candidate than one who supports the present city council members. Their record of getting anything right is dismal.
XT225
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2612
Likes: 863 posts
Liked in: 706 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby CTF » Aug 14th, 2014, 11:59 am

XT225 wrote:
Hey, thats fine and dandy. I would much rather choose the PHA candidate than one who supports the present city council members. Their record of getting anything right is dismal.


I certainly agree with you that there is a need to have some new faces on council
CTF
Fledgling
 
Posts: 172
Likes: 23 posts
Liked in: 48 posts
Joined: Sep 21st, 2012, 11:58 am

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby fluffy » Aug 14th, 2014, 3:28 pm

XT225 wrote:Hey, thats fine and dandy. I would much rather choose the PHA candidate than one who supports the present city council members. Their record of getting anything right is dismal.


Not me. The PHA's blackmail tactics in ousting the newly formed Penticton Business Development Group and gaining control of the room tax funds still burns hot in my memory. The PBDG represented some of Penticton's best and brightest, and was eminently more qualified to handle tourist marketing that any other group in town, including the PHA. The last couple of years bears out my opinion as the PHA has accomplished jack squat. Come election time any candidate associated with the PHA shouldn't be holding their breath for my vote.
Okey dokey doggie daddy.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 19424
Likes: 351 posts
Liked in: 4420 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby twobits » Aug 14th, 2014, 3:29 pm

CTF wrote:
I certainly agree with you that there is a need to have some new faces on council


At least four new faces. Thankfully the little twerp vacated on his own.
XT, with all due respect, "great guys" do not mean great councillors. Recent news articles have reported psych evaluations for past councillor and Mayoral candidate Gary Leaman. According to the psychiatrist, Mr Leaman scored extremely high as a narcissist. Do you remember how terrible he was as a councillor? If you are unfamiliar with the definition of narcissist, look it up and compare it to some the behaviour and publicity stunts the "good guy" pulls.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 7223
Likes: 1092 posts
Liked in: 3855 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 9:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby CTF » Dec 18th, 2014, 10:59 am

So now that the PHA won the court case anyone know what they have been doing to promote Penticton since?
CTF
Fledgling
 
Posts: 172
Likes: 23 posts
Liked in: 48 posts
Joined: Sep 21st, 2012, 11:58 am

Re: PHA won the court case

Postby livewire » Dec 18th, 2014, 12:07 pm

Nothing. At least nothing we've heard about.

You'd think after all this mess they'd be sure to pull up their boots and actually start doing what they should be doing and then making darn sure we all knew about it so we felt like maybe right decision was made.....but no.

CTF likes this post.
livewire
Fledgling
 
Posts: 312
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 22 posts
Joined: Nov 3rd, 2011, 3:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to South Okanagan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest