Not only their coaching - but all the activities surrounding it without any relation to official city business. Do you seriously expect us to believe that they are doing so in a "volunteer capacity" during work hours?
I have no clue. If their other duties are being completed (and they would have to be, I presume), then its possible, especially since I believe they're paid a base salary and work irregular hours. Like I said, I do have a problem with this, but I don't think it invalidates Ford's track record on everything else. I also have a hard time buying the argument that Ford's staff does less city-related work than regular - I've dealt directly with them for some problems in my neighborhood and they had them solved quickly and promptly, which is more than my councilor has ever done for me.
700 bucks, on an office budget of 1+M? Even cell phones/plans alone would have cost that much for an office staff of his size. And if the city didn't pay for that, what legal right does city have to the access communications made on said phones, should the need arise?
I'm not sure where you're getting this $700 figure from. The link I posted shows that the mayor's office has spent over $2000 in expenses for this year's first quarter, which is about right in the middle of the councilor's expenses.
If you don't have a full picture of how his staff spent their working hours (let's not even get to the mayor himself, given the lack of clarity with his work hours/schedule - if one's Chief of Staff have no clue where his worship is most of the time, is that a good sign that they are "working"?), I am not sure how you can come to the conclusion that he has a good track record in terms of accountability. As to spending taxpayers money, I am not sure if the output justified that rosy conclusion.
Accountability in terms of spending taxpayer's money. By all measures, he has been more accountable in that regard (reducing the mayor's budget, reducing councilor's budgets, keeping expenses low). Whether that's a good thing or not is another argument entirely.
Here's the thing -
it's not all about expenses. This is the biggest problem with Ford - he can't see the forest for the trees. Yeah, he has lower office expenses - but everyone except for Doug says he is understaffed and isn't accomplishing what he should be because of it. Also, if you read
this reporter's experience in having Ford come out to visit him, it becomes clear that he isn't making very good use of his or his staff's time - [B
8 people[/B] to go out and talk about some construction? Is that
really the most efficient use of the City's resources?
What exactly is he supposed to be accomplishing though? There's all this talk that his office is understaffed and that there aren't enough people to do all the work, but the only basis for this seems to be that the previous guy in office had more staff and spent more. No one has clearly defined what isn't being done with Ford's reduced staff and budget.
I can't think of a better use for city resources than helping people directly with city issues. 8 people is overboard though.
Then you're not really making any kind of point, are you - and it's not really an "accomplishment", is it?
Councilors voted to bump their expense budget back up, not Ford. Since we're talking about Ford's track record in regard to public spending, reducing the councilor's budget (even if the councilors had it reinstated a year or two down the line) is pertinent.
