keoadmin
08-26-2005, 12:03 PM
I.M.Pertinent
Thank goodness for the ongoing Whig expose on Market Square donations. We can't have citizens randomly handing over money to a community project, getting a plaque with their name on it and expecting to get away with it. Nope, not in Kingston.
Does anyone else feel at least a touch embarassed for this community over the treatment of the Springer family? The Springers donate a million bucks to the city's Market Square restoration project in return for the promise of a plaque that says Springer Market Square and a seat on a public committee that approves the events on the square and instead of thanks, the community has done little but heap scorn on the family.The Whig has dedicated less ink to murders than to the Springer donation and has made allegations that the Springers twisted the city's arm with a big fat cheque to rename the square. Citizens have threatened a lawsuit.
According to the newspaper, we can now add George Hood and Peggy Reid and families to the roster of notorious criminals guilty of making philanthropic donations to a City of Kingston project. Hood, according to the Whig, in addition to having committed a random act of generosity, is alleged to have a conflict of interest because, as fundraising consultant to the city on Market Square, he recommended council accept his donation and put his name on a lamp post. Doesn't conflict of interest apply to those with voting power? And doesn't conflict of interest refer to the potential for financial gain? Has Hood has been secretly appointed a voting member of council? Maybe he's planning to make a profit by flipping his Market Square lamp post?
The juiciest Market Square revelation of the last few days isn't even donations or naming rights. The bigger scandal here, and the one that's been glossed over, is who the heck leaked documents from an in-camera council meeting to the press? Who can forget what some called a "witch hunt" launched by former Mayor Isabel Turner when someone leaked Block D plans from an in camera meeting a couple of years ago. Turner called the cops for Pete's sake and had developers, councillors and staff hauled in for lie detector tests. The Whig makes it sound like the leaking of Market Square documents was a public service when in fact, someone violated ethics, the trust of council and the law.
Obviously there would not be such antipathy toward the Market Square donation program if city council had not botched the approval of donations and the naming-in-recognition from beginning to end by doing it all in closed session. But if naming in recognition is truly such a no-no in the community, why are we focusing only on Market Square donors? Why not find out the name of every person who has donated to the Grand Theatre restoration project and investigate what naming opportunities have been offered there as well? When we're through with city projects, let's look at other public institutions. Kingston General Hospital and Queen's with their privately-funded wings and halls ought to provide some interesting news items. And why stop with public spaces? Maybe we could investigate donors to Vicki Keith's Million Dollar Marathon. Enough Market Square-like coverage for Vicki's sponsors and we might be able to discourage people from donating to a pool for kids at the Y too!
It will be a miracle if the Springers and other wealthy families continue to make philanthropic donations to municipal or charitable projects in Kingston. Why would they?
Thank goodness for the ongoing Whig expose on Market Square donations. We can't have citizens randomly handing over money to a community project, getting a plaque with their name on it and expecting to get away with it. Nope, not in Kingston.
Does anyone else feel at least a touch embarassed for this community over the treatment of the Springer family? The Springers donate a million bucks to the city's Market Square restoration project in return for the promise of a plaque that says Springer Market Square and a seat on a public committee that approves the events on the square and instead of thanks, the community has done little but heap scorn on the family.The Whig has dedicated less ink to murders than to the Springer donation and has made allegations that the Springers twisted the city's arm with a big fat cheque to rename the square. Citizens have threatened a lawsuit.
According to the newspaper, we can now add George Hood and Peggy Reid and families to the roster of notorious criminals guilty of making philanthropic donations to a City of Kingston project. Hood, according to the Whig, in addition to having committed a random act of generosity, is alleged to have a conflict of interest because, as fundraising consultant to the city on Market Square, he recommended council accept his donation and put his name on a lamp post. Doesn't conflict of interest apply to those with voting power? And doesn't conflict of interest refer to the potential for financial gain? Has Hood has been secretly appointed a voting member of council? Maybe he's planning to make a profit by flipping his Market Square lamp post?
The juiciest Market Square revelation of the last few days isn't even donations or naming rights. The bigger scandal here, and the one that's been glossed over, is who the heck leaked documents from an in-camera council meeting to the press? Who can forget what some called a "witch hunt" launched by former Mayor Isabel Turner when someone leaked Block D plans from an in camera meeting a couple of years ago. Turner called the cops for Pete's sake and had developers, councillors and staff hauled in for lie detector tests. The Whig makes it sound like the leaking of Market Square documents was a public service when in fact, someone violated ethics, the trust of council and the law.
Obviously there would not be such antipathy toward the Market Square donation program if city council had not botched the approval of donations and the naming-in-recognition from beginning to end by doing it all in closed session. But if naming in recognition is truly such a no-no in the community, why are we focusing only on Market Square donors? Why not find out the name of every person who has donated to the Grand Theatre restoration project and investigate what naming opportunities have been offered there as well? When we're through with city projects, let's look at other public institutions. Kingston General Hospital and Queen's with their privately-funded wings and halls ought to provide some interesting news items. And why stop with public spaces? Maybe we could investigate donors to Vicki Keith's Million Dollar Marathon. Enough Market Square-like coverage for Vicki's sponsors and we might be able to discourage people from donating to a pool for kids at the Y too!
It will be a miracle if the Springers and other wealthy families continue to make philanthropic donations to municipal or charitable projects in Kingston. Why would they?