Lots of talk in the hockey world these days... Summerside got "outmanoeuvred" by Serge Sevard Sr. and their hopes for Lewiston playing in the "Palace" (Credit Union Place) are all but foiled for now... but I'm thinking a strategic move for Basil and the "boys" would be continuing to always think big and take a run at getting the Phoenix Coyotes to move to the City of Summerside... think about it!!! we just heard the news that the Atlanta Thrashers are moving to Winnipeg and the Manitoba Moose are off to Newfoundland so why not the "Coyotes" to S'Side to help "fill" the Palace...
Phoenix is not that far out of the way from the concert law suit in San Jose, Calf. so the boys could save some air fare while they're doing the negotiations... remember, you heard it here first!
Maineiacs saga comes to end with yes vote
Published on June 2, 2011
The Guardian
A league buyout is a strange way to dismantle a franchise, but the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League voted to purchase the floundering Lewiston Maineiacs on Tuesday.
A new expansion team will be awarded to Sherbrooke, Que., for the 2012-13 season.
Those interests are spearheaded by Jocelyn Thibault, former QMJHL and NHL goalie.
The league will release later this week a 17-team schedule for 2011-12.
A dispersal draft of Lewiston's players goes Friday at noon, a day before the main entry draft on Saturday in Victoriaville, Que.
Financial terms of the deal weren’t disclosed.
The action came after a board of governors vote on Tuesday.
It all was good news for Serge Savard Jr., P.E.I. Rocket president and governor, because it ended months-long speculation and rumour Lewiston planned to relocate to Summerside and the 4,400-seat Credit Union Place arena.
“Obviously, I voted for (the purchase). I think it’s OK. We said all along two teams wouldn’t survive on on the Island. And it was clear the franchise couldn’t keep operating in Lewiston,” said Savard from Victoriaville, Que., where the 2011 QMJHL entry draft is being held on Saturday. “It protected Charlottetown. Owners will always protect their markets. That’s their first mandate.”
The near-unanimous yes vote puts to bed an odd, gossip-filled saga that kept alive talk of Lewiston relocating even after an informal conference call between the governors and league commissioner Gilles Courteau in late May drew little support for the move from the franchises.
The Rocket re-upped with the City of Charlottetown in April for another three years.
That move closed off the odds of a team choosing Summerside at its home base.
But since December 2010, Lewiston, with Summerside native Bill Schurman as a management consultant, and lured by Credit Union Place, and disappointed by its awful gate returns at the Androscoggin Arena in Lewiston, wooed Summerside repeatedly.
The Maineiacs even toured CUP, current home of the Maritime Hockey League’s Summerside Western Capitals, during a two-game road trip to P.E.I. in early March.
But the franchise, which moved to Maine from Sherbrooke in 2003, couldn't survive its poor attendance that flagged even after winning the President’s Cup in 2007.
Last season, Lewiston averaged just over 2,000 spectators per game.
“I am truly sad for Maineiacs fans,” said Mark Just, Lewiston majority owner, in a release. “For those that supported the team over the past few years, I would like to thank you. Nonetheless, mounting financial losses became too much to bear for our ownership group.”
So, Sherbrooke will get a team again, the third time around since 1969.
Next season, it will play at its old home — the 46-year-old, 5,000-seat Palais des Sports Léopold-Drolet - once arrangements are made with the current tenant, the Sherbrooke Saint-Francois of the Ligue Nord-Américaine de Hockey.
“Sherbrooke is not ready to accept a team right away,” said Savard. “We (the board) were on the same page. We would like a franchise in Sherbrooke. It was no-brainer for us.”
A board vote was expected Wednesday to determine in what order the teams will pick in the dispersal draft.
Some of the players available Friday are defenceman Samuel Finn, Columbus Blue Devils prospect Michael Chaput, New York Islanders pick Kirill Kabanov, defenceman Dillon Fournier, the top selection in the 2010 QMJHL draft, and Étienne Brodeur, the league’s only 50-goal scorer this past season.
The Rocket pick ninth overall in Saturday’s entry draft.
creid@theguardian.pe.ca
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Homburg "vigorously contesting"...
In the May 30th issue of the news website Allnovascotia.com, which does in-depth coverage on business affairs in Atlantic Canada, there were two thorough articles on the struggles of Richard Homburg’s publicly traded company, Homburg Invest Inc.
According to allnovascotia.com’s David Bentley, the Dutch’s Authority for Financial Markets (AFM) are asking Homburg Invest Inc. to remove founder and controlling shareholder Richard Homburg from the company.
In Bentley’s pieces, he sheds light on some of the managerial changes and turmoil that have made headlines for Homburg Invest Inc. in the last few months – most notably that Richard Homburg has stepped down from being chairman and CEO.
Homburg Invest Inc. is traded in Dutch and Canadian markets so they must appease both countries’ set of laws and regulations. Simply removing Mr. Homburg from the board and taking away his shares doesn’t mesh with existing Canadian financial laws. Hence, a dilemma for Homburg Invest Inc.’s board. Bentley says that Homburg Invest Inc. CEO Jan Schoningh is “vigorously contesting” the AFM’s decision, which is based on a dispute between Dutch tax authorities and Mr. Homburg.
Schoningh laments that the AFM didn’t suggest a legal method for removing Mr. Homburg.
“The board cannot itself legally reduce the control Mr. Homburg exercises through his shareholdings, nor can it compel Mr. Homburg to reduce his control… Further, Homburg Invest Inc. cannot restrict, or in any manner vary, the voting rights that attach to those shares. As a consequence, Homburg Invest Inc. is left in the difficult position of being unable to carry out these aspects of the institution.”
The Homburg Invest Inc. board has created a committee of legal counsel and financial advisors to make a strategy that will benefit shareholders while Mr. Homburg’s dispute is resolved.
But questions were raised about how long it’s been since Mr. Homburg knew the AFM was going to take action. Bentley suggests that it would have been sooner, rather than later. And if that is true, then Homburg Invest Inc. did not fulfill their obligation to disclose that information to shareholders in March 22 and May 11 releases.
Bentley points out that Homburg Invest Inc. and the AFM have had a ‘rocky’ relationship, citing an example where the company was fined for failing to disclose certain details about its corporate structure. Homburg Capital BV, another Richard Homburg-founded company, was fined 192,000 Euros by the AFM for providing investment advice to clients without the proper license necessary.
Homburg Invest Inc. shareholders have been suffering since the world financial meltdown. Both classes of shares were consolidated on a 10-for-1 basis in late 2008. At the time, they were trading in the $11 - $13 range. Share values are also dropping because Homburg’s corporate activities are prone to funnel management fees to his private companies.
Richard Homburg immigrated to Nova Scotia in 1972, where he began building a Halifax-based real estate portfolio. Most of his assets were financed by cash raised in Europe via limited partnerships. He returned to Amsterdam twenty years later and opened Uni-Invest NV, a publicly traded real estate company. Homburg Invest Inc. was founded in 2001 and featured a Western-Canada focus, heavily financed by European commercial properties, until it took a hit in the 2008 financial meltdown. Most of his best Canadian assets were hived off to Homburg REIT (which is also seeing lower share prices) but Homburg Invest Inc. itself has a portfolio that is 87% European properties, and it is struggling.
As of March 31, this year, it had total assets of $2.1 billion, but only $100 million in equity once long - term debt and other obligations were factored in.
For more information, please sign up for Allnovascotia at http://www.allnovascotia.com/
The following news release is from Homburg Invest's own website...
HOMBURG INVEST RECEIVES INSTRUCTION FROM NETHERLANDS REGULATORY AUTHORITY
05-26-2011
HALIFAX, May 26, 2011 /CNW Telbec/ - (TSX: HII.A HII.B) (AEX: HII) - Homburg Invest Inc. ("HII" or the "Company") announced today that the Company has received an instruction (the "Instruction") from the Authority for Financial Markets ("AFM") in the Netherlands requiring it to appoint two directors or officers who are residents of the Netherlands.
The AFM also instructed HII to remove HII's controlling shareholder Richard Homburg as a decision-maker and person of influence in the Company. The AFM did not specify any process or means by which the Instruction to remove Mr. Homburg as a person of influence should be carried out.
The Board of Directors is taking steps to comply with those elements of the Instruction that it can legally undertake, such as submitting candidates to the AFM for Netherlands-based directors. HII cannot comply with any aspect of the Instruction that is not enforceable under, or would result in a breach of, Canadian or Dutch law. The Board of Directors of HII cannot itself legally reduce the control Mr. Homburg exercises over HII through his shareholdings nor can it compel Mr. Homburg to reduce his control. The Board has no authority under HII's governing law, the Alberta Business Corporations Act, to require Mr. Homburg or any other shareholder to reduce that holder's ownership in HII, or to not vote that holder's shares. Further, HII cannot restrict or in any manner vary the voting rights that attach to those shares. As a consequence, HII is left in the difficult position of being unable to carry out these aspects of the Instruction.
In its Instruction to the Company, the AFM relies on information it apparently received from Dutch authorities and from Mr. Homburg about tax assessments, which have not been resolved and which are being contested by Mr. Homburg, and other personal matters between Mr. Homburg and the Dutch tax authorities.
"HII is vigorously contesting the AFM Instruction, which is based on a dispute between the Dutch tax authorities and a private individual (Mr. Homburg)," said Jan Schöningh, President and Chief Executive Officer of HII. "HII will continue to explore all possible recourses available to it in order to protect HII and its stakeholders. I want to reassure shareholders that there is no material financial impact of this Instruction on the Company and that we continue to focus on building value for shareholders."
About Homburg Invest
Homburg Invest, with its head office in Halifax, Nova Scotia, owns and develops a diversified portfolio of quality real estate including office, retail, industrial and residential apartment and townhouse properties throughout Canada, the United States and Europe.
According to allnovascotia.com’s David Bentley, the Dutch’s Authority for Financial Markets (AFM) are asking Homburg Invest Inc. to remove founder and controlling shareholder Richard Homburg from the company.
In Bentley’s pieces, he sheds light on some of the managerial changes and turmoil that have made headlines for Homburg Invest Inc. in the last few months – most notably that Richard Homburg has stepped down from being chairman and CEO.
Homburg Invest Inc. is traded in Dutch and Canadian markets so they must appease both countries’ set of laws and regulations. Simply removing Mr. Homburg from the board and taking away his shares doesn’t mesh with existing Canadian financial laws. Hence, a dilemma for Homburg Invest Inc.’s board. Bentley says that Homburg Invest Inc. CEO Jan Schoningh is “vigorously contesting” the AFM’s decision, which is based on a dispute between Dutch tax authorities and Mr. Homburg.
Schoningh laments that the AFM didn’t suggest a legal method for removing Mr. Homburg.
“The board cannot itself legally reduce the control Mr. Homburg exercises through his shareholdings, nor can it compel Mr. Homburg to reduce his control… Further, Homburg Invest Inc. cannot restrict, or in any manner vary, the voting rights that attach to those shares. As a consequence, Homburg Invest Inc. is left in the difficult position of being unable to carry out these aspects of the institution.”
The Homburg Invest Inc. board has created a committee of legal counsel and financial advisors to make a strategy that will benefit shareholders while Mr. Homburg’s dispute is resolved.
But questions were raised about how long it’s been since Mr. Homburg knew the AFM was going to take action. Bentley suggests that it would have been sooner, rather than later. And if that is true, then Homburg Invest Inc. did not fulfill their obligation to disclose that information to shareholders in March 22 and May 11 releases.
Bentley points out that Homburg Invest Inc. and the AFM have had a ‘rocky’ relationship, citing an example where the company was fined for failing to disclose certain details about its corporate structure. Homburg Capital BV, another Richard Homburg-founded company, was fined 192,000 Euros by the AFM for providing investment advice to clients without the proper license necessary.
Homburg Invest Inc. shareholders have been suffering since the world financial meltdown. Both classes of shares were consolidated on a 10-for-1 basis in late 2008. At the time, they were trading in the $11 - $13 range. Share values are also dropping because Homburg’s corporate activities are prone to funnel management fees to his private companies.
Richard Homburg immigrated to Nova Scotia in 1972, where he began building a Halifax-based real estate portfolio. Most of his assets were financed by cash raised in Europe via limited partnerships. He returned to Amsterdam twenty years later and opened Uni-Invest NV, a publicly traded real estate company. Homburg Invest Inc. was founded in 2001 and featured a Western-Canada focus, heavily financed by European commercial properties, until it took a hit in the 2008 financial meltdown. Most of his best Canadian assets were hived off to Homburg REIT (which is also seeing lower share prices) but Homburg Invest Inc. itself has a portfolio that is 87% European properties, and it is struggling.
As of March 31, this year, it had total assets of $2.1 billion, but only $100 million in equity once long - term debt and other obligations were factored in.
For more information, please sign up for Allnovascotia at http://www.allnovascotia.com/
The following news release is from Homburg Invest's own website...
HOMBURG INVEST RECEIVES INSTRUCTION FROM NETHERLANDS REGULATORY AUTHORITY
05-26-2011
HALIFAX, May 26, 2011 /CNW Telbec/ - (TSX: HII.A HII.B) (AEX: HII) - Homburg Invest Inc. ("HII" or the "Company") announced today that the Company has received an instruction (the "Instruction") from the Authority for Financial Markets ("AFM") in the Netherlands requiring it to appoint two directors or officers who are residents of the Netherlands.
The AFM also instructed HII to remove HII's controlling shareholder Richard Homburg as a decision-maker and person of influence in the Company. The AFM did not specify any process or means by which the Instruction to remove Mr. Homburg as a person of influence should be carried out.
The Board of Directors is taking steps to comply with those elements of the Instruction that it can legally undertake, such as submitting candidates to the AFM for Netherlands-based directors. HII cannot comply with any aspect of the Instruction that is not enforceable under, or would result in a breach of, Canadian or Dutch law. The Board of Directors of HII cannot itself legally reduce the control Mr. Homburg exercises over HII through his shareholdings nor can it compel Mr. Homburg to reduce his control. The Board has no authority under HII's governing law, the Alberta Business Corporations Act, to require Mr. Homburg or any other shareholder to reduce that holder's ownership in HII, or to not vote that holder's shares. Further, HII cannot restrict or in any manner vary the voting rights that attach to those shares. As a consequence, HII is left in the difficult position of being unable to carry out these aspects of the Instruction.
In its Instruction to the Company, the AFM relies on information it apparently received from Dutch authorities and from Mr. Homburg about tax assessments, which have not been resolved and which are being contested by Mr. Homburg, and other personal matters between Mr. Homburg and the Dutch tax authorities.
"HII is vigorously contesting the AFM Instruction, which is based on a dispute between the Dutch tax authorities and a private individual (Mr. Homburg)," said Jan Schöningh, President and Chief Executive Officer of HII. "HII will continue to explore all possible recourses available to it in order to protect HII and its stakeholders. I want to reassure shareholders that there is no material financial impact of this Instruction on the Company and that we continue to focus on building value for shareholders."
About Homburg Invest
Homburg Invest, with its head office in Halifax, Nova Scotia, owns and develops a diversified portfolio of quality real estate including office, retail, industrial and residential apartment and townhouse properties throughout Canada, the United States and Europe.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Here's My Prediction.... for what it's worth!
OK... I'm back on PEI in time to vote (cold here) and I'm going to call it a “Harper Majority” but I'm saying that all the ridings on PEI will remain "unchanged"... although the Tories have good candidates in Cardigan and Malpeque both Lawrence and Wayne have done great constituency work and I don't think Islanders will toss them out for "no reason"... Sean Casey has the upper hand over Donna Bush as Shawn Murphy left a strong riding organization that is working hard for Sean and Donna is not that well known... the "blue majority tide" will certainly put pressure on the three existing Liberal seats but I'm saying they'll stay "red"... that’s how I see it. The question is have I been away to long and lost touch?
Monday, April 18, 2011
THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER...
THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important ? They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important ? They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Sorry Guys... "what about the little guy?"
I'm having a little difficulty here with this concept... Minigoo originally opens and screws local contractors for millions of dollars and now they "re-open" without offering up something to the small contractors they screwed??? There's something fishy here and I find it hard to believe that they're marching forward without some form of repayment scheme for the people they've caused severe hardship to...
Companies get in trouble for a variety of reasons, some of which are out of their control... in our case our plant, Storemark Fixtures in Pooles Corner, came under server pressure due to the change in the Canadian dollar coupled with a major slowdown in the economy... we lost millions of real dollars and we seen competitors like Levi Fixtures in Moncton and Cabinetmaster in Charlottetown fall like flies, due to the shakeups in that industry... but never once did we ever consider avoiding our responsibilities to our suppliers; we talked to our suppliers, we kept our employees informed, we were upfront with our lenders, we developed a scaled down plan and we pooled our resources... and I'm happy to say we're still operating (at about a quarter of the size we once were) but our bills are paid, people are working and our future seems a lot brighter... All this was achieved by "working with people and suppliers" and I can honestly tell you that the majority of them understood our situation and were quite willing to co-operate, especially the little guys....
"Re-opening" by "ignoring the little guy" through some bankruptcy scheme, and not offering up a future settlement plan is just not acceptable... from what I understand in talking with a few experienced fish processors is that the new company, like the old company, hasn't a Snowball's Chance in Hell of being successful in the first place... but the gesture to try and settle with the little guy would have been a little more palpable... I wonder what we'd hear from Minigoo if the shoe was on the other foot and "they" weren't being paid?
Minigoo processing plant to re-open
CBC News
Mar 7, 2011
There are plans to re-open a lobster processing plant on Lennox Island First Nation, on the north coast of P.E.I.
Alan Baker, the band's economic development officer, confirmed Monday that they're just putting the finishing touches on plans to process again this spring. Baker said it will be "business as usual" come the first of May.
Minigoo Fisheries, the company that ran the plant, went bankrupt last July after only a few months in operation, owing creditors more than $3 million. The only entirely native-owned lobster processing plant in the Maritimes, the operation shut down after the spring lobster fishery.
But, just weeks later, the Lennox Island Band was back in the plant, operating under a slightly different name — Minigoo 2010. They hired an experienced manager to process lobster from August to November of last year, and about 70 people worked there.
Owed money
Creditor Chris Deagle, of Deagle Construction, said Minigoo Fisheries went under owing him $140,000 for general contract work. He said the loss has been extremely hard on his company, and his family.
"If they would have come to the table in good faith and said, 'We'll try, we'll put a package together, we will pay you, it might take some time,' I would have been totally open to that," Deagle said. "But to shut the doors, change the name to Minigoo Fisheries 2010 within a few weeks of shutting the doors…"
Mike McGeoghegan, president of the PEI Fishermen's Association said the plant is a good one, and they hope it will work this time. "The plant's open, they'll have the fish and I think it's good. I think they can get the markets going," he said.
Last year, the band council admitted that pretty much everything that could go wrong with Minigoo Fisheries, did. Now, the Lennox Island Mi'kmaq band and fishermen are pinning their hopes on this new company to run the plant successfully.
Companies get in trouble for a variety of reasons, some of which are out of their control... in our case our plant, Storemark Fixtures in Pooles Corner, came under server pressure due to the change in the Canadian dollar coupled with a major slowdown in the economy... we lost millions of real dollars and we seen competitors like Levi Fixtures in Moncton and Cabinetmaster in Charlottetown fall like flies, due to the shakeups in that industry... but never once did we ever consider avoiding our responsibilities to our suppliers; we talked to our suppliers, we kept our employees informed, we were upfront with our lenders, we developed a scaled down plan and we pooled our resources... and I'm happy to say we're still operating (at about a quarter of the size we once were) but our bills are paid, people are working and our future seems a lot brighter... All this was achieved by "working with people and suppliers" and I can honestly tell you that the majority of them understood our situation and were quite willing to co-operate, especially the little guys....
"Re-opening" by "ignoring the little guy" through some bankruptcy scheme, and not offering up a future settlement plan is just not acceptable... from what I understand in talking with a few experienced fish processors is that the new company, like the old company, hasn't a Snowball's Chance in Hell of being successful in the first place... but the gesture to try and settle with the little guy would have been a little more palpable... I wonder what we'd hear from Minigoo if the shoe was on the other foot and "they" weren't being paid?
Minigoo processing plant to re-open
CBC News
Mar 7, 2011
There are plans to re-open a lobster processing plant on Lennox Island First Nation, on the north coast of P.E.I.
Alan Baker, the band's economic development officer, confirmed Monday that they're just putting the finishing touches on plans to process again this spring. Baker said it will be "business as usual" come the first of May.
Minigoo Fisheries, the company that ran the plant, went bankrupt last July after only a few months in operation, owing creditors more than $3 million. The only entirely native-owned lobster processing plant in the Maritimes, the operation shut down after the spring lobster fishery.
But, just weeks later, the Lennox Island Band was back in the plant, operating under a slightly different name — Minigoo 2010. They hired an experienced manager to process lobster from August to November of last year, and about 70 people worked there.
Owed money
Creditor Chris Deagle, of Deagle Construction, said Minigoo Fisheries went under owing him $140,000 for general contract work. He said the loss has been extremely hard on his company, and his family.
"If they would have come to the table in good faith and said, 'We'll try, we'll put a package together, we will pay you, it might take some time,' I would have been totally open to that," Deagle said. "But to shut the doors, change the name to Minigoo Fisheries 2010 within a few weeks of shutting the doors…"
Mike McGeoghegan, president of the PEI Fishermen's Association said the plant is a good one, and they hope it will work this time. "The plant's open, they'll have the fish and I think it's good. I think they can get the markets going," he said.
Last year, the band council admitted that pretty much everything that could go wrong with Minigoo Fisheries, did. Now, the Lennox Island Mi'kmaq band and fishermen are pinning their hopes on this new company to run the plant successfully.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Now here's a good analysis of the City's own review...
Here's what Lilley from Summerside had to say in the Journal's comments form about the City conducting their own investigation... Lilley - City to conduct review of concert file?? Isn't that like one fox asking the other fox, "What happened to the Chickens"?
City to conduct review of concert file
Journal Pioneer
Mike Carson
Published on March 2, 2011
SUMMERSIDE – City council is preparing to conduct an internal review into a concert deal that could cost taxpayers $1.3 million.
It was revealed Monday night that a week ago, following a closed session of city council, a resolution was passed calling for council to “review the process that placed the city in the current situation concerning the major concert scheduled for 2010 from an accountability framework including review of staff and council roles.”
Council met again behind closed doors on Monday night to decide how to handle the internal review.
In a statement released late Monday night Gordon MacFarlane, director of Human Resources and Legal Affairs, wrote “council and staff are working collaboratively to determine terms of reference for an internal review to complete an assessment of the process and how to implement effective safeguards to avoid being defrauded in the future.”
While the city’s official statement offers little insight into the issue, the resolution passed by the new city council last week does. It specifically targets accountability on the part of city management, staff and the former councillors, three of which still sit on council, for their involvement in sending $1.3 million to a San Jose, Calif. concert promoter for a concert that has yet to materialize. The city filed a suit for fraud against the promoter in January. The promoter has refuted any suggestion of wrongdoing.
MacFarlane said Tuesday the terms of reference for the review will cover a wide range of topics not the least of which is who will conduct the internal review.
MacFarlane said the term “internal review” doesn’t necessarily mean the city will be doing the assessment on its own. “The internal part just implies that somebody will be looking at ourselves,” he said. MacFarlane said no timeline has been set for the assessment to be completed.
One of the three remaining councillors who supported the concert deal back in 2009 is Deputy Mayor Bruce MacDougall. “I have no problem with it (review) being done,” MacDougall said. “If we can learn from it, that’s great.” The whole idea of a new city council calling for an internal review of the actions of city management, staff and the former council implies mistakes were made in the whole concert issue – what was done, how it was done. “It’s not that we’re saying something’s wrong,” he said. “We’re saying let’s do a review so we can learn from this and show the people that were are being accountable.”
Mayor Basil Stewart was also part of the 2009 city council involved in the concert decisions. Stewart said the internal assessment will help council find out what exactly happened. “We want to determine where this got off the rails and try and be sure that it doesn’t happen again and what can be learned from it,” the mayor said. “Maybe we’ll get it back on the rails. We’ll see how it unfolds.”
Stewart said this will not be a quick look and that the process will take time. “We’re not pointing fingers we’re just trying to get a layout on how things unfolded the way they did,” he said. “They are still unfolding. We’re not going to be a bull in a china shop.”
Councillor Tina Mundy said accountability is what has to happen. “We have to look at what happened and how it happened and make sure that it doesn’t happen again,” she said. “Obviously, something did go wrong. What, we don’t know. We need to investigate it. We need to have a look at it. We need to show the public we are being accountable. The public wants to know. There’s not a day that goes by that somebody doesn’t ask me what I’m doing. So, we owe it to the citizens of Summerside to look into this and find out what went wrong and to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”
Councillor Jim Steele wants an independent party to conduct the review. Steele said he doesn’t see the internal assessment focusing on the failed concert and the $1.3 million sitting in a San Jose escrow account, but rather using the findings to set a policy to avoid any future misdealings.
“I think what we need to do is find out exactly what we have to do to make things better,” he said. “It’s a situation where it went out of line and we’re going to look at it and get everything in proper order and have everything in line when we do a project. That’s an education part of it. We’re not pointing the fingers at anybody. We’re not going after council.
“What we’re doing is going after a study to make sure that we as a council work together, follow procedures and make sure things are in order so we don’t get into this situation again.”
City to conduct review of concert file
Journal Pioneer
Mike Carson
Published on March 2, 2011
SUMMERSIDE – City council is preparing to conduct an internal review into a concert deal that could cost taxpayers $1.3 million.
It was revealed Monday night that a week ago, following a closed session of city council, a resolution was passed calling for council to “review the process that placed the city in the current situation concerning the major concert scheduled for 2010 from an accountability framework including review of staff and council roles.”
Council met again behind closed doors on Monday night to decide how to handle the internal review.
In a statement released late Monday night Gordon MacFarlane, director of Human Resources and Legal Affairs, wrote “council and staff are working collaboratively to determine terms of reference for an internal review to complete an assessment of the process and how to implement effective safeguards to avoid being defrauded in the future.”
While the city’s official statement offers little insight into the issue, the resolution passed by the new city council last week does. It specifically targets accountability on the part of city management, staff and the former councillors, three of which still sit on council, for their involvement in sending $1.3 million to a San Jose, Calif. concert promoter for a concert that has yet to materialize. The city filed a suit for fraud against the promoter in January. The promoter has refuted any suggestion of wrongdoing.
MacFarlane said Tuesday the terms of reference for the review will cover a wide range of topics not the least of which is who will conduct the internal review.
MacFarlane said the term “internal review” doesn’t necessarily mean the city will be doing the assessment on its own. “The internal part just implies that somebody will be looking at ourselves,” he said. MacFarlane said no timeline has been set for the assessment to be completed.
One of the three remaining councillors who supported the concert deal back in 2009 is Deputy Mayor Bruce MacDougall. “I have no problem with it (review) being done,” MacDougall said. “If we can learn from it, that’s great.” The whole idea of a new city council calling for an internal review of the actions of city management, staff and the former council implies mistakes were made in the whole concert issue – what was done, how it was done. “It’s not that we’re saying something’s wrong,” he said. “We’re saying let’s do a review so we can learn from this and show the people that were are being accountable.”
Mayor Basil Stewart was also part of the 2009 city council involved in the concert decisions. Stewart said the internal assessment will help council find out what exactly happened. “We want to determine where this got off the rails and try and be sure that it doesn’t happen again and what can be learned from it,” the mayor said. “Maybe we’ll get it back on the rails. We’ll see how it unfolds.”
Stewart said this will not be a quick look and that the process will take time. “We’re not pointing fingers we’re just trying to get a layout on how things unfolded the way they did,” he said. “They are still unfolding. We’re not going to be a bull in a china shop.”
Councillor Tina Mundy said accountability is what has to happen. “We have to look at what happened and how it happened and make sure that it doesn’t happen again,” she said. “Obviously, something did go wrong. What, we don’t know. We need to investigate it. We need to have a look at it. We need to show the public we are being accountable. The public wants to know. There’s not a day that goes by that somebody doesn’t ask me what I’m doing. So, we owe it to the citizens of Summerside to look into this and find out what went wrong and to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”
Councillor Jim Steele wants an independent party to conduct the review. Steele said he doesn’t see the internal assessment focusing on the failed concert and the $1.3 million sitting in a San Jose escrow account, but rather using the findings to set a policy to avoid any future misdealings.
“I think what we need to do is find out exactly what we have to do to make things better,” he said. “It’s a situation where it went out of line and we’re going to look at it and get everything in proper order and have everything in line when we do a project. That’s an education part of it. We’re not pointing the fingers at anybody. We’re not going after council.
“What we’re doing is going after a study to make sure that we as a council work together, follow procedures and make sure things are in order so we don’t get into this situation again.”
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Bang On Mr. Caseley... but "good luck" anyway!
I couldn't agree more with Mr. Caseley's observations that chasing developers away because some NIMBY's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY show up certainly sends the message to developers to stay away from developing in that Town... on the other hand there was a recent story on CBC where there was great concern from local citizens that Downtown Kensington was losing businesses and starting to look quite "rundown"...
It's sort of a catch 22 if you want a healthy Downtown then you have to let your Community grow and develop in order to create demand... and that's where Council have to learn to "balance" in the best interests of the overall community... my guess is that the neighbours claim that their real estate values would go down by 25% because the area is going to be more densely populated is a bit of “red herring” as it's been my experience that if your community is growing then real estate values grow with it, but when you stop demand then that's when the values start to go down... but when you throw those Clowns from IRAC into the equation then it's a safe bet your project is dead as they give more balance to NIMBY’s than someone trying to fuel the economy... but "good luck" anyway Mr. Caseley...
Kensington land dispute before IRAC
Thursday, February 10, 2011
CBC News
The Town of Kensington, P.E.I. sent the wrong message when it rejected a residential development plan, says the man who wants to build it.
Caseley was one of several developers approached by Mayor Gordon Coffin to build more single dwelling homes in Kensington. Caseley put together a plan to expand his Rosewood subdivision, built 20 years ago.
But instead of single family dwellings, he proposed to put in duplexes and one multiplex. Caseley said the cost of building had doubled and multi-units were more economical. The land was never zoned, so Casely went to the town for approval. Much to his surprise the residents of Rosewood opposed the development.
"Quite a big reaction really," said Caseley. "They thought there was going to be more traffic and it was going to lower their property values by 25 per cent."
On investigating the issue, council discovered that wasn't true. In fact, values would likely increase with the expansion. Despite that, council voted unanimously against the plan.
Mayor Gordon Coffin said councillors believed the concerns of residents should be listened to.
Caseley was especially surprised by the opposition to the multi-unit buildings because there are already three six-unit buildings in the subdivision. Caseley said the council vote sends a bad message to developers.
"Kensington has a long history of shooting themselves in the foot," he said. "A developer would look at that and say 'well, guess they're impossible to deal with. We'll just go somewhere else and develop.'"
Caseley has already invested $45,000 in the project and has appealed the council vote to the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission. IRAC is expected to make a decision by the end of this month.
It's sort of a catch 22 if you want a healthy Downtown then you have to let your Community grow and develop in order to create demand... and that's where Council have to learn to "balance" in the best interests of the overall community... my guess is that the neighbours claim that their real estate values would go down by 25% because the area is going to be more densely populated is a bit of “red herring” as it's been my experience that if your community is growing then real estate values grow with it, but when you stop demand then that's when the values start to go down... but when you throw those Clowns from IRAC into the equation then it's a safe bet your project is dead as they give more balance to NIMBY’s than someone trying to fuel the economy... but "good luck" anyway Mr. Caseley...
Kensington land dispute before IRAC
Thursday, February 10, 2011
CBC News
The Town of Kensington, P.E.I. sent the wrong message when it rejected a residential development plan, says the man who wants to build it.
Caseley was one of several developers approached by Mayor Gordon Coffin to build more single dwelling homes in Kensington. Caseley put together a plan to expand his Rosewood subdivision, built 20 years ago.
But instead of single family dwellings, he proposed to put in duplexes and one multiplex. Caseley said the cost of building had doubled and multi-units were more economical. The land was never zoned, so Casely went to the town for approval. Much to his surprise the residents of Rosewood opposed the development.
"Quite a big reaction really," said Caseley. "They thought there was going to be more traffic and it was going to lower their property values by 25 per cent."
On investigating the issue, council discovered that wasn't true. In fact, values would likely increase with the expansion. Despite that, council voted unanimously against the plan.
Mayor Gordon Coffin said councillors believed the concerns of residents should be listened to.
Caseley was especially surprised by the opposition to the multi-unit buildings because there are already three six-unit buildings in the subdivision. Caseley said the council vote sends a bad message to developers.
"Kensington has a long history of shooting themselves in the foot," he said. "A developer would look at that and say 'well, guess they're impossible to deal with. We'll just go somewhere else and develop.'"
Caseley has already invested $45,000 in the project and has appealed the council vote to the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission. IRAC is expected to make a decision by the end of this month.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Woof, Woof, Woof... who let the dogs out?
Well we don't know what her sales are but we do know, according to the City of Summerside, that she does at least $1,300,000 a year and that Trevor, Robbie & Fiona (pictured here)
"are standing by to handle any emergency for you!" and that should really comfort Summerside taxpayers... This is really turning out to be a first class caper and don't be suprised if we see CTV's "W5" driving around Summerside soon... Woof, woof, woof... who let the dogs out?
Promoter says Summerside negotiating with two firms
Published on February 5, 2011 SUMMERSIDE — A California concert promotion company has issued more harsh words toward the City of Summerside, and this time has also aimed its sights at one of the world's largest concert promoters.
Katrina Berg Sussmeier, head of Starlink Productions out of San Jose, Calif., continued to lay blame on the City of Summerside for the failure of a proposed Michael Jackson Tribute Concert under development for the city.
The city has filed papers in the U.S. District Court California San Jose Division, charging Sussmeier with fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, negligent misrepresentation and rescission of contract. The city's claims have not been proven in court.
Sussmeier issued a statement Friday in which she said the city had started dealing with another promoter, while still in talks with her for the same production.
“I have recently learned that, although I have the contract with Summerside to produce this event, they have gone behind my back and been simultaneously soliciting and negotiating with Live Nation (a Los Angeles-based competitor) to produce the identical event,” Sussmeier said in her statement.
She said the addition of the second promoter “sabotaged” her ability to secure Beyonce Knowles and others.
But Riley O'Connor, chairman of Live Nation Canada, said the company has not been approached by the city to undertake any promotion.
“They haven't had any discussions with us, period,” O'Connor said Friday. “There's been no discussion with our company whatsoever.”
Neither Mayor Basil Stewart nor Chief Administrative Officer Terry Murphy could be reached for comment Friday regarding Sussmeier's allegations or if the city is still pursuing a “mega-concert.”
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
"Make no mistake".... there's more to this story!
I was reading with interest Charles Reid's article in the Guardian today about no QMJHL teams filing to have their franchises moved when I happened along this… "Island businessman Tim Banks (and Banks' boast of a $1.5-million guaranteed gate at Credit Union Place in Summerside)"… and I quickly thought where did they get the "twerp" that's writing this... so I checked the record and I said "I'm hearing" this, which is exactly what I was "hearing" and I certainly wasn't going around "boasting" it... further in the article Mr. Reid states that "But Summerside officials have said no deal with Lewiston is on the table." and Mr. Reid, if you're relying on a forthright statement from Summerside officials then have I got a concert deal for you... I even called the Guardian looking for Mr. Reid but no one seemed to know him?
Some people may have questioned why I waded into a hockey issue but to me it's a much bigger issue as a Summerside taxpayer... Credit Union Place is bleeding like a stuffed pig because it was "overbuilt" and now we're paying for it... and I was hearing from solid sources that there was a move afoot to develop a "scheme" to get a "major" team in the building and I'm pretty sure Gillis Courteau and Billy Schurman weren't in the City to watch the Lobster Carnival parade. I was concerned that the City might be entering into another scheme without the full knowledge of it's taxpayers... the Rocket in the City of Charlottetown, with over twice the drawing capacity, can only average about 2,000 fans a game and even at that, I understand both the City and the Province have to chip in and they’re still losing... so how can one conclude that there's room for two teams here without "more bleeding" put on our taxpayers... Ask Basil or S'Side's management and they'll make no bones about wanting a major junior team... but at what cost?
And make no mistake about it… if the "Concert Fiasco" hadn't broke recently in the news then I wonder if there would have been an application in front of the QMJHL and my guess is "Yes"… and you can quote me on that, but don't say I'm boasting… just say I’ve been around long enough to know that someone should be watching what’s going on in Summerside!
No QMJHL teams file before relocation deadline
Published on Febuary 1st, 2011
Charles Reid
The Guardian
Well, it looks like all the speculation around some Quebec Major Junior hockey League teams moving to new places for next season may be just that — speculation.
The deadline for teams to apply to the league requesting permission to move relocate came and went, and, said a league spokesman on Monday, the QMJHL wasn’t expecting paperwork from any of its 18 teams.
“We have not received any requests and do not anticipate receiving any,” said Karl Janhke, who spoke for the league. “Deadline was 11:59 p.m. (Monday). We’ll be sending out a release (this) morning.”
It all stems from an assertion from Charlottetown mayor Clifford Lee and Island businessman Tim Banks (and Banks’ boast of a $1.5-million guaranteed gate at Credit Union Place in Summerside) the floundering Lewiston Maineiacs had signed a deal to relocate to Summerside next season.
Lewiston, which moved to Maine in 2003 from Sherbrooke, Que., has suffered from low attendance since landing there — even during its run to the Memorial Cup in 2007.
But Summerside officials have said no deal with Lewiston is on the table.
The move, if true, would put the Maineiacs in direct competition with the P.E.I. Rocket, which moved to Charlottetown in 2003 from Montreal. Serge Savard Jr., Rocket president and governor, has said two QMJHL teams couldn’t survive on P.E.I.
Adding to the talk is the league has an open market in Sherbrooke, Que., and a group headed by former NHL goalie Jocelyn Thibeau is interested in buying a QMJHL franchise and perhaps moving it to Quebec.
Also, QMJHL commissioner Gilles Courteau visited Summerside in December and Bill Schurman, a management consultant with Lewiston and a former Moncton Wildcats general manager, is a Summerside native.
P.E.I., Lewiston and the struggling Acadie-Bathurst Titan have all been mentioned as candidates for sale as those squads are suffering from half-filled buildings for most home games.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
This should get the phones ringing...
As I previously suggested it didn't take long for Wal-Mart Canada to react to Target coming to Canada. My guess is that each of these new stores will cost about $30 million a pop to develop so it's great news for the economy and the retail development business in Canada.... it will motivate other retailers to react by freshening up or repositioning their stores in our marketplace and this approximate $1.2 billion dollar investment by Wal-Mart will create a lot of spin off jobs...
For all you folks on PEI who love to work on rumours... "it's not going on the lot we're developing across from Bed, Bath and Beyond" and that's all I know (or prepared to talk about)...
Date: Wednesday Jan. 26, 2011
MISSISSAUGA, Ont. — Wal-Mart Canada is ramping up expansion plans for its supercentres -- the extra-large locations that combine general merchandise and groceries.
The retail giant says it will open 40 new Canadian supercentres in its upcoming fiscal year starting Feb. 1 through both renovating and relocating some existing stores and constructing new ones.
While the location of the new stores hasn't been announced yet, the plan will expand the supercentre concept into Manitoba and Quebec, and represents a combined investment of nearly $500 million.
Wal-Mart said the plan could create more than 9,200 jobs in stores and in the construction sector.
The retailer opened its first Canadian supercentres in Ontario in 2006.
At the end of this month it will have 325 stores, of which 124 will be supercentres.
For all you folks on PEI who love to work on rumours... "it's not going on the lot we're developing across from Bed, Bath and Beyond" and that's all I know (or prepared to talk about)...
Wal-Mart Canada plans to open 40 supercentres
The Canadian PressDate: Wednesday Jan. 26, 2011
MISSISSAUGA, Ont. — Wal-Mart Canada is ramping up expansion plans for its supercentres -- the extra-large locations that combine general merchandise and groceries.
The retail giant says it will open 40 new Canadian supercentres in its upcoming fiscal year starting Feb. 1 through both renovating and relocating some existing stores and constructing new ones.
While the location of the new stores hasn't been announced yet, the plan will expand the supercentre concept into Manitoba and Quebec, and represents a combined investment of nearly $500 million.
Wal-Mart said the plan could create more than 9,200 jobs in stores and in the construction sector.
The retailer opened its first Canadian supercentres in Ontario in 2006.
At the end of this month it will have 325 stores, of which 124 will be supercentres.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Yikes!!! maybe "Wes the Cat"
I just had a buzz around Starlink Productions’ web site http://www.starlinkproductions.com and it's hard to believe you'd send these guys a “stamp” let alone real money... where was the due diligence? My guess is the legal bill to try and recover these funds will be outrageous and the likelihood of getting anything back will be negligible so maybe Justice Douglas could send “Wes the Cat” up to Credit Union place to put on a show as part of his “community work”.... and although I don’t see Wes in Starlink’s line-up, he does a great “Elvis” impression with the guitar, and he would certainly fit in with all their other acts.... "YIKES"
Summerside suing for concert funds
Published on January 25th, 2011
SUMMERSIDE — The City of Summerside has initiated legal action against a California promoter to recoup $1.3 million, which was advanced to the promoter to bring a major concert to the city.
On Monday, the city was to file a complaint with the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division, for fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, negligent misrepresentation and rescission (rescinding) of a contract against Katrina Berg Sussmeier and Starlink Productions Inc.
In the Nature of Action against Sussmeier and Starlink Productions, the city alleges that in July 2009, Sussmeier presented the city with the opportunity to hold the Michael Jackson Tribute Concert featuring performances by Beyonce, Usher, Ne-Yo and Leona Lewis.
“In July and August 2009, Sussmeier pressured representatives of the city to act immediately to book the concert and represented that she and Starlink had the authority to arrange for such a mega-concert,” the Notice of Action claims.
The city entered an agreement with Sussmeier on July 24, 2009. In late July, Sussmeier emailed the city demanding an immediate wire payment of $650,000 so Beyonce’s appearance at the concert could be guaranteed.
“You’ll have Justin Timberlake, Ne-Yo, Usher, Beyonce if we get that wire,” she stated in an email to J.P. Desrosier, events and program development officer with the city.
The city sent the money and, in September, entered into a Deal Memorandum and Binder Agreement claiming Starlink was providing the services of artists arranging the Michael Jackson Tribute Show.
According to the city’s suit, “Sussmeier personally signed the memorandum on behalf of both Starlink and the purported artists who would appear at the concert.”
The court papers allege Sussmeier told the city she was working to produce the tribute show with Frank DiLeo, DLM Management Group/DiLeo Entertainment &Touring Inc. (DLM), who once was Michael Jackson’s personal manager.
Sussmeier told the city’s representatives that entities controlled by DLM and Mark Lamicka and Quincy Krashna, acting as agents for DLM, were arranging for the production of the concert.
Papers to be filed with the court claim that between October 2009 and March 2010, Sussmeier repeatedly assured the city the tribute concert was moving forward as scheduled.
By early March 2010, Sussmeier is alleged to have informed city officials that despite the agreement entered into in September requesting the $650,000, “in order to assure Beyonce’s appearance at the concert, the city would need to make a second payment of $650,000 and sign an amended Deal Memo and Binder Agreement.”
According to the complaint filed by the City of Summerside, Sussmeier told city officials that “Beyonce is waiting for your offer with deposit but won’t be waiting long,” and that she could “absolutely confirm” that other acts were solid.
On March 10, the city wired a second $650,000 deposit to Starlink.
The city’s Notice of Action claims the Michael Jackson Tribute Show was “from start to finish an elaborate fraud ... no such concert existed.”
“On information and belief, the artists whom Sussmeier falsely represented would appear at the Tribute Show, including Beyonce, Fergie from the Black Eyed Peas, Ne-Yo and Leona Lewis (Timberlake had exited the concert plans earlier), had not agreed or ever committed to appear at any concert in Prince Edward Island in the summer of 2010.
“Moreover, on information and belief, the purported organizers of the concert had never obtained permission from the Michael Jackson estate or Jackson family to organize a tribute show for Michael Jackson in Summerside or elsewhere,” stated the city’s papers.
The action goes on to state, “Neither Beyonce nor any of her agents or representatives had ever sought the two payments of $650,000 that Sussmeier told the city would confirm and guarantee Beyonce’s appearance at the concert.”
The action further claims Beyonce’s management, on April 21, 2010, when first presented with the idea of performing in Summerside, rejected the idea.
“When Sussmeier in July 2009 and March 2010 induced payments of $650,000 from the city to confirm Beyonce’s appearance at a concert in Prince Edward Island, Beyonce had never even received a proposal for such a concert much less requested that the city or anyone else pay a deposit to secure such a concert.”
None of the city’s allegations have been proven in court.
Summerside Chief Administrative Officer Terry Murphy said the city had dealt successfully with Sussmeier’s company in promoting the John Fogerty concert in 2009 and trusted the promoter could deliver the promised concert in 2010.
“Unfortunately, the city was badly let down as the promoters did not deliver on the major concert as promised.”
Summerside suing for concert funds
Published on January 25th, 2011
SUMMERSIDE — The City of Summerside has initiated legal action against a California promoter to recoup $1.3 million, which was advanced to the promoter to bring a major concert to the city.
On Monday, the city was to file a complaint with the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division, for fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, negligent misrepresentation and rescission (rescinding) of a contract against Katrina Berg Sussmeier and Starlink Productions Inc.
In the Nature of Action against Sussmeier and Starlink Productions, the city alleges that in July 2009, Sussmeier presented the city with the opportunity to hold the Michael Jackson Tribute Concert featuring performances by Beyonce, Usher, Ne-Yo and Leona Lewis.
“In July and August 2009, Sussmeier pressured representatives of the city to act immediately to book the concert and represented that she and Starlink had the authority to arrange for such a mega-concert,” the Notice of Action claims.
The city entered an agreement with Sussmeier on July 24, 2009. In late July, Sussmeier emailed the city demanding an immediate wire payment of $650,000 so Beyonce’s appearance at the concert could be guaranteed.
“You’ll have Justin Timberlake, Ne-Yo, Usher, Beyonce if we get that wire,” she stated in an email to J.P. Desrosier, events and program development officer with the city.
The city sent the money and, in September, entered into a Deal Memorandum and Binder Agreement claiming Starlink was providing the services of artists arranging the Michael Jackson Tribute Show.
According to the city’s suit, “Sussmeier personally signed the memorandum on behalf of both Starlink and the purported artists who would appear at the concert.”
The court papers allege Sussmeier told the city she was working to produce the tribute show with Frank DiLeo, DLM Management Group/DiLeo Entertainment &Touring Inc. (DLM), who once was Michael Jackson’s personal manager.
Sussmeier told the city’s representatives that entities controlled by DLM and Mark Lamicka and Quincy Krashna, acting as agents for DLM, were arranging for the production of the concert.
Papers to be filed with the court claim that between October 2009 and March 2010, Sussmeier repeatedly assured the city the tribute concert was moving forward as scheduled.
By early March 2010, Sussmeier is alleged to have informed city officials that despite the agreement entered into in September requesting the $650,000, “in order to assure Beyonce’s appearance at the concert, the city would need to make a second payment of $650,000 and sign an amended Deal Memo and Binder Agreement.”
According to the complaint filed by the City of Summerside, Sussmeier told city officials that “Beyonce is waiting for your offer with deposit but won’t be waiting long,” and that she could “absolutely confirm” that other acts were solid.
On March 10, the city wired a second $650,000 deposit to Starlink.
The city’s Notice of Action claims the Michael Jackson Tribute Show was “from start to finish an elaborate fraud ... no such concert existed.”
“On information and belief, the artists whom Sussmeier falsely represented would appear at the Tribute Show, including Beyonce, Fergie from the Black Eyed Peas, Ne-Yo and Leona Lewis (Timberlake had exited the concert plans earlier), had not agreed or ever committed to appear at any concert in Prince Edward Island in the summer of 2010.
“Moreover, on information and belief, the purported organizers of the concert had never obtained permission from the Michael Jackson estate or Jackson family to organize a tribute show for Michael Jackson in Summerside or elsewhere,” stated the city’s papers.
The action goes on to state, “Neither Beyonce nor any of her agents or representatives had ever sought the two payments of $650,000 that Sussmeier told the city would confirm and guarantee Beyonce’s appearance at the concert.”
The action further claims Beyonce’s management, on April 21, 2010, when first presented with the idea of performing in Summerside, rejected the idea.
“When Sussmeier in July 2009 and March 2010 induced payments of $650,000 from the city to confirm Beyonce’s appearance at a concert in Prince Edward Island, Beyonce had never even received a proposal for such a concert much less requested that the city or anyone else pay a deposit to secure such a concert.”
None of the city’s allegations have been proven in court.
Summerside Chief Administrative Officer Terry Murphy said the city had dealt successfully with Sussmeier’s company in promoting the John Fogerty concert in 2009 and trusted the promoter could deliver the promised concert in 2010.
“Unfortunately, the city was badly let down as the promoters did not deliver on the major concert as promised.”
Monday, January 24, 2011
Don't lose any sleep... I'm not!
It's pretty simple. I'm in the development business and like Danny I believe a "branded" hotel will work in the Charlottetown market place.... so we developed a scheme to build one based on a receiving a "confirmation" letter from the Province that a new Convention Centre would be built in Charlottetown... and we "never" received a letter before our "options" were up so we weren't prepared to plough $2,100,000 into buying Kevin's site unless we had this written confirmation...
As a developer you get used to getting up every day with people trying to stop you and it may be the NIMBY crowd, the Don't Get Ahead Gang, competitors, or just someone trying to put a knife in your back but they always seem to rear their heads when it's a major project in the Greater Charlottetown area. In fact, Charlottetown City Councillor Rob Lantz even gets to Tweet it as a promotion piece for the City as here's what he had to say... "APM will not be building the hotel they had proposed for Kays Building property on Queen St. someone else has purchased property"... kind of positive!
When we tried to build the original Superstore in Ch'town we had tons of issues including losing our option on the Kirkwood Motel and having our permit "denied" at IRAC which the Guardian headlined as "Superstore Loses"... the mistake we made there was we didn't build the first one big enough so we doubled the size a few years later! For those of you who can remember back then the spin was “it will be too big”... well Sobey’s built two more new ones, IGA built a new one, and a couple of new Shopper’s came about.
On Greenfield Avenue, when we tried to tear down the old Provincial Sanatorium to make way for 19 family homes the "crazies" were out in full force talking about rehabilitating the old structure, that was derelict at best. Today we’re very proud of Brighton Commons and how's its developed into the neighbourhood we live in.
In Stratford, we started out to build a new Home Hardware to replace the old one that was busting at the seams... and lo and behold we had Mayor Farmer and his band of merry men fighting us in the Supreme Court trying stop us and if that wasn't enough Minister Don MacKinnon was trying to have me arrested for trying to use a public road to get to the store... I'm happy to say we're over there now building and investing in another building.
On Pownal Street, we tried to build a condo/apartment and after a year of planning and development our permit was again "tossed" by IRAC and we had to start over by developing a relationship with Homburg... and we eventually got to build and develop a even larger development in the "Northumberland" condominium project.
On Spring Park Road we were trying to consolidate two R3 lots that we're being used as a "construction yard" to build a new 37 unit apartment building.... and City Council voted against it and leading the cause was none other than former City Councillor Philip Brown... I'm happy to say we persisted and developed a beautiful building that has cleaned up the area and made a lot of seniors happy.
When we went to build our new APM head office building on Water Street both planning board and City Council objected to our plans so we were turned down and we lost our option on the property. But we did spend about $8,000,0000 developing our new building on another Ch'town property and I'm always excited showing up to work with the talented group of people who "make it happen" at APM... and I'm never embarrassed about the great work they do and I never lose any sleep when someone suggests it may not work as "my crowd" will figure out how...
The plan we proposed for the Kay's building is a great plan and I'm still hoping to make it work as we know there's opportunity here to "develop" another branded hotel and that's what we do... new rooms, new investment, and new jobs in our tourism industry, together with a larger tax base is good for everyone... I’m not losing any sleep as I’m to busy counting ways how to get the project done... it's a tough business but someone has to do it!
Downtown property changes hands
The Guardian,
by Jim Day
January 21st, 2011
Danny Murphy is in and Tim Banks is out for development of prime piece of real estate in downtown Charlottetown.
Murphy told The Guardian today he purchased the corner lot on Queen, Water and King Streets last month from his brother Kevin Murphy.
Danny says he is looking at the options for development. "I'm in the hotel business," he said.
"There is a need for a hotel down in that end of the town with the convention centre (coming)...so we will be developing that area."
Danny says he has "no idea'' when work may begin.
Banks, CEO of the construction and property development company APM, made plenty of noise over his plan to develop a $22-million project on that very location.
He was looking to develop a 120-room hotel, a parking garage with about 63 spaces, 14 fully furnished apartment units and six condominium units.
Banks sued Judy Gallant and Lys-Ondra Goulet after they appealed the city's approval of the hotel. The two Charlottetown women then counter-sued and went on to lose their appeal to the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission.
The two sides eventually agreed to drop their lawsuits.
As a developer you get used to getting up every day with people trying to stop you and it may be the NIMBY crowd, the Don't Get Ahead Gang, competitors, or just someone trying to put a knife in your back but they always seem to rear their heads when it's a major project in the Greater Charlottetown area. In fact, Charlottetown City Councillor Rob Lantz even gets to Tweet it as a promotion piece for the City as here's what he had to say... "APM will not be building the hotel they had proposed for Kays Building property on Queen St. someone else has purchased property"... kind of positive!
When we tried to build the original Superstore in Ch'town we had tons of issues including losing our option on the Kirkwood Motel and having our permit "denied" at IRAC which the Guardian headlined as "Superstore Loses"... the mistake we made there was we didn't build the first one big enough so we doubled the size a few years later! For those of you who can remember back then the spin was “it will be too big”... well Sobey’s built two more new ones, IGA built a new one, and a couple of new Shopper’s came about.
On Greenfield Avenue, when we tried to tear down the old Provincial Sanatorium to make way for 19 family homes the "crazies" were out in full force talking about rehabilitating the old structure, that was derelict at best. Today we’re very proud of Brighton Commons and how's its developed into the neighbourhood we live in.
In Stratford, we started out to build a new Home Hardware to replace the old one that was busting at the seams... and lo and behold we had Mayor Farmer and his band of merry men fighting us in the Supreme Court trying stop us and if that wasn't enough Minister Don MacKinnon was trying to have me arrested for trying to use a public road to get to the store... I'm happy to say we're over there now building and investing in another building.
On Pownal Street, we tried to build a condo/apartment and after a year of planning and development our permit was again "tossed" by IRAC and we had to start over by developing a relationship with Homburg... and we eventually got to build and develop a even larger development in the "Northumberland" condominium project.
On Spring Park Road we were trying to consolidate two R3 lots that we're being used as a "construction yard" to build a new 37 unit apartment building.... and City Council voted against it and leading the cause was none other than former City Councillor Philip Brown... I'm happy to say we persisted and developed a beautiful building that has cleaned up the area and made a lot of seniors happy.
When we went to build our new APM head office building on Water Street both planning board and City Council objected to our plans so we were turned down and we lost our option on the property. But we did spend about $8,000,0000 developing our new building on another Ch'town property and I'm always excited showing up to work with the talented group of people who "make it happen" at APM... and I'm never embarrassed about the great work they do and I never lose any sleep when someone suggests it may not work as "my crowd" will figure out how...
The plan we proposed for the Kay's building is a great plan and I'm still hoping to make it work as we know there's opportunity here to "develop" another branded hotel and that's what we do... new rooms, new investment, and new jobs in our tourism industry, together with a larger tax base is good for everyone... I’m not losing any sleep as I’m to busy counting ways how to get the project done... it's a tough business but someone has to do it!
Downtown property changes hands
The Guardian,
by Jim Day
January 21st, 2011
Danny Murphy is in and Tim Banks is out for development of prime piece of real estate in downtown Charlottetown.
Murphy told The Guardian today he purchased the corner lot on Queen, Water and King Streets last month from his brother Kevin Murphy.
Danny says he is looking at the options for development. "I'm in the hotel business," he said.
"There is a need for a hotel down in that end of the town with the convention centre (coming)...so we will be developing that area."
Danny says he has "no idea'' when work may begin.
Banks, CEO of the construction and property development company APM, made plenty of noise over his plan to develop a $22-million project on that very location.
He was looking to develop a 120-room hotel, a parking garage with about 63 spaces, 14 fully furnished apartment units and six condominium units.
Banks sued Judy Gallant and Lys-Ondra Goulet after they appealed the city's approval of the hotel. The two Charlottetown women then counter-sued and went on to lose their appeal to the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission.
The two sides eventually agreed to drop their lawsuits.
"Off With Their Heads"
I was reading the front page of the Guardian this morning and came across this story that our Finance Minister Wes Sheridan was holding private meetings this Wednesday in Ch'town to discuss "identifying waste in Government" and to call Ruth at 902-368-4050 for an appointment... well I couldn't believe my good fortune that I could get in to see Wes and "reload" on the enormous waste at our Provincially owned golf courses and also take a shot a those pork barrelling pigs at IRAC... plus a bunch of other pet peeves that I've been mouthing off about!!!
The bad news is he's "full-up" so I guess I wasn't up early enough as a bunch of people got ahead of me and he's booked until February 16th... the funny thing is when I was speaking to his office they volunteered that they had paid ads in the Guardian and had very little response but since he went public in the media "the phone has been ringing off the hook" looking for appointments so maybe they should stop paying for "advertising" and get out in the public more...
And just maybe some "public" meetings on the subject would also help Islanders understand the pressures on Minister Sheridan as we all have to start looking at how we get our Government expenses under control... Government can't do everything for everybody so I agree that we shouldn't expect any new programs in the next budget and hopefully more efficiency and more cutting of "waste"... as for IRAC... "Off With Their Heads"
Finance minister asks Islanders to help identify waste
Published on January 24th, 2011
Wayne Thibodeau
Wes Sheridan says he’s looking to Prince Edward Island residents to identify government waste as the finance minister begins pre-budget consultations this week.
The finance minister is grappling with a $54.9 million budget shortfall this year. Both Premier Robert Ghiz and the finance minister said Islanders should not expect any flashy new programs in this spring’s budget, even though it’s an election year, because they need to take steps to reign in the spending. The Liberals are promising to balance the budget by 2013/14.
Sheridan says he expects to hear a lot more suggestions this time around in how the provincial government can save money. “Everyone sees that every department is important in different ways,” said Sheridan. “There’s very little waste so it’s a matter of trying to prioritize what is important to Islanders. That’s what we have to do.”
The finance minister will be holding pre-budget consultations today at Access P.E.I. in Summerside. On Wednesday, Jan. 26, he’ll hold court in Charlottetown. Those consultations will be held on the third floor of the Shaw Building. Pre-budget consultations move east to Access P.E.I. in Montague on Thursday, Jan. 27.
The finance minister is available by appointment only from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. To make an appointment contact Ruth Chandler at the Department of Finance at (902) 368-4050. Those meetings will be held in private.
To read all this Guardian story http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2011-01-24/article-2159672/Finance-minister-asks-Islanders-to-help-identify-waste/1
The bad news is he's "full-up" so I guess I wasn't up early enough as a bunch of people got ahead of me and he's booked until February 16th... the funny thing is when I was speaking to his office they volunteered that they had paid ads in the Guardian and had very little response but since he went public in the media "the phone has been ringing off the hook" looking for appointments so maybe they should stop paying for "advertising" and get out in the public more...
And just maybe some "public" meetings on the subject would also help Islanders understand the pressures on Minister Sheridan as we all have to start looking at how we get our Government expenses under control... Government can't do everything for everybody so I agree that we shouldn't expect any new programs in the next budget and hopefully more efficiency and more cutting of "waste"... as for IRAC... "Off With Their Heads"
Finance minister asks Islanders to help identify waste
Published on January 24th, 2011
Wayne Thibodeau
Wes Sheridan says he’s looking to Prince Edward Island residents to identify government waste as the finance minister begins pre-budget consultations this week.
The finance minister is grappling with a $54.9 million budget shortfall this year. Both Premier Robert Ghiz and the finance minister said Islanders should not expect any flashy new programs in this spring’s budget, even though it’s an election year, because they need to take steps to reign in the spending. The Liberals are promising to balance the budget by 2013/14.
Sheridan says he expects to hear a lot more suggestions this time around in how the provincial government can save money. “Everyone sees that every department is important in different ways,” said Sheridan. “There’s very little waste so it’s a matter of trying to prioritize what is important to Islanders. That’s what we have to do.”
The finance minister will be holding pre-budget consultations today at Access P.E.I. in Summerside. On Wednesday, Jan. 26, he’ll hold court in Charlottetown. Those consultations will be held on the third floor of the Shaw Building. Pre-budget consultations move east to Access P.E.I. in Montague on Thursday, Jan. 27.
The finance minister is available by appointment only from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. To make an appointment contact Ruth Chandler at the Department of Finance at (902) 368-4050. Those meetings will be held in private.
To read all this Guardian story http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2011-01-24/article-2159672/Finance-minister-asks-Islanders-to-help-identify-waste/1
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Larry the Leader... and his great "Manifesto" with an eye on "detail"...
Well it is the winter here on PEI and we're stuck between storms so for some pure entertainment you should take a look at the great "Manifesto" that was released by PEI's newest political party "The Island Party of P.E.I." which seems to have more letters in its name than party members... but seriously this 8 page "Writ" reads like the Chronicles of Riddick and none other than our most famous Larry McGuire of Morell stepping in to the role of Mr. Pork Barrel as the occasional party leader... so here's your copy http://theislandpartypei.ca/docs/communique01.pdf and I'm pretty sure the document itself should speak to how they will do in the next election as they couldn't even spell poor Larry's name right... but who cares about "detail" anyway when you're this close to forming Government.... Ring the bell boys as there's someone at the door in Unit 9 looking for your vote or delivering a pizza....
Island Party issues first communique
Published on January 17th, 2011
Ryan Ross, the Guardian
As the province heads into a fall election, P.E.I.’s newest political party is trying to spread the word about what it stands for.
The Island Party has released what it’s referring to as its first communiqué to explain the party’s political philosophy as organizers try to boost membership numbers and gather support for the upcoming election.
In its communiqué, the party acknowledged some of the hurdles it faces, including the lack of a party leader, and worries that people may not take it seriously, although it didn’t include any specific details about an election platform. Spokesperson Jason McGregor said the Island Party organizers want to take their time as they build to make sure everything is done right.
“Basically, thinking about building a strong party fundamentally, we decided that it’s important to have a base philosophy on which to base our platform,” he said.
The Island Party became official last March with Jay Gallant as the temporary party leader, but when he stepped down, it left a vacancy at the top that has yet to be filled. But despite being leaderless, several party members have been meeting regularly to help develop the party’s policies and build the membership from its current 25 to 35 members.
McGregor said the party may need one firm spokesperson to lead it, but the members haven’t decided on the process to pick a leader and have considered a system similar to the one used in Nunavut, which has no party leaders. “That is still up in the air as well,” he said.
As it heads into the election, the party is hoping to have a candidate run in each of the province’s 27 ridings and the organizers think it is possible, although the party hasn’t started finding candidates yet, he said. “We think it is realistic to have candidates in each district come election time.”
McGregor said a lot of people don’t know about the Island Party or what it stands for, which is why party organizers released the communiqué because people won’t start to take it seriously until they know its philosophy.
“One of our biggest fears is people will dismiss us even when they don’t know anything about us because to dismiss something is to look past something that could be a very good thing, could be another good route and so that just adds into our philosophy.” For the rest of the story see: http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2011-01-17/article-2122223/Island-Party-issues-first-communique/1
Island Party issues first communique
Published on January 17th, 2011
Ryan Ross, the Guardian
As the province heads into a fall election, P.E.I.’s newest political party is trying to spread the word about what it stands for.
The Island Party has released what it’s referring to as its first communiqué to explain the party’s political philosophy as organizers try to boost membership numbers and gather support for the upcoming election.
In its communiqué, the party acknowledged some of the hurdles it faces, including the lack of a party leader, and worries that people may not take it seriously, although it didn’t include any specific details about an election platform. Spokesperson Jason McGregor said the Island Party organizers want to take their time as they build to make sure everything is done right.
“Basically, thinking about building a strong party fundamentally, we decided that it’s important to have a base philosophy on which to base our platform,” he said.
The Island Party became official last March with Jay Gallant as the temporary party leader, but when he stepped down, it left a vacancy at the top that has yet to be filled. But despite being leaderless, several party members have been meeting regularly to help develop the party’s policies and build the membership from its current 25 to 35 members.
McGregor said the party may need one firm spokesperson to lead it, but the members haven’t decided on the process to pick a leader and have considered a system similar to the one used in Nunavut, which has no party leaders. “That is still up in the air as well,” he said.
As it heads into the election, the party is hoping to have a candidate run in each of the province’s 27 ridings and the organizers think it is possible, although the party hasn’t started finding candidates yet, he said. “We think it is realistic to have candidates in each district come election time.”
McGregor said a lot of people don’t know about the Island Party or what it stands for, which is why party organizers released the communiqué because people won’t start to take it seriously until they know its philosophy.
“One of our biggest fears is people will dismiss us even when they don’t know anything about us because to dismiss something is to look past something that could be a very good thing, could be another good route and so that just adds into our philosophy.” For the rest of the story see: http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2011-01-17/article-2122223/Island-Party-issues-first-communique/1
Here's What Paul MacNeill Said... about our famous "Mitch"...
CITY CAN'T IGNORE TWEEL'S LEGAL ISSUE
Second Opinion by Paul MacNeill,
publisher Eastern Graphic
Wed, January 19, 2011
Charlottetown city councillor Mitch Tweel went uncharacteristically silent after a December court proceeding requiring him to stay away from an unidentified female.
The long time councillor agreed to what is known as an 810 recognizance. Islanders don’t know the specifics. We do know that the female lodged a complaint with police on November 10. The issue is serious enough that if Tweel does not abide by the order he could face a criminal charge.
To date the normally chatty councillor has remained absolutely silent. He skipped council’s December meeting. At the January meeting media allowed him to rattle on about a stop sign issue. When they asked for comment on his legal issue he simply turned and walked away.
Sorry Mitch. That is not good enough. Elected officials do not have the right to simply refuse to talk. But if you insist on silence there should be repercussions.
For instance, media should not allow the councillor to comment on any other issue. Why give him a forum when he refuses to discuss an issue that raises questions about his fitness to be on council?
More importantly, Mayor Clifford Lee must not accept his silence. Why has the mayor not removed Councillor Tweel as chairman of the city’s Human Resources Committee, which is responsible for ensuring a positive work environment for all city employees? Does the mayor believe female city staff has absolute confidence in the committee under Tweel’s leadership and his ability to work effectively on their behalf?
Mayor Clifford Lee needs to stand up for city employees. He needs to stand up for the city’s female employees. He needs to remove Councillor Tweel as chairman of Human Resources.
Silence from the Mayor and Councillor Tweel is not an option
Tweel walks away from questions on stay-away order
The Guardian,
January 11th, 2010
Coun. Mitchell Tweel abruptly walked away from the media Monday night when asked to comment on the stay-away order that was issued against him last month in provincial court.
Tweel didn’t attend December’s public meeting of council so members of the media asked him to comment on the issue Monday night.
In December, Tweel signed an 810 recognizance in which he agreed to have no contact of any kind with an unidentified woman who sought the order.
Police received a complaint on Nov. 10 from the woman and, after investigating the complaint, police turned the matter over to the Crown attorney’s office to review.
Police said the victim feared for her safety.
When Tweel was asked about it Monday night, he abruptly walked away without saying a word.
Second Opinion by Paul MacNeill,
publisher Eastern Graphic
Wed, January 19, 2011
Charlottetown city councillor Mitch Tweel went uncharacteristically silent after a December court proceeding requiring him to stay away from an unidentified female.
The long time councillor agreed to what is known as an 810 recognizance. Islanders don’t know the specifics. We do know that the female lodged a complaint with police on November 10. The issue is serious enough that if Tweel does not abide by the order he could face a criminal charge.
To date the normally chatty councillor has remained absolutely silent. He skipped council’s December meeting. At the January meeting media allowed him to rattle on about a stop sign issue. When they asked for comment on his legal issue he simply turned and walked away.
Sorry Mitch. That is not good enough. Elected officials do not have the right to simply refuse to talk. But if you insist on silence there should be repercussions.
For instance, media should not allow the councillor to comment on any other issue. Why give him a forum when he refuses to discuss an issue that raises questions about his fitness to be on council?
More importantly, Mayor Clifford Lee must not accept his silence. Why has the mayor not removed Councillor Tweel as chairman of the city’s Human Resources Committee, which is responsible for ensuring a positive work environment for all city employees? Does the mayor believe female city staff has absolute confidence in the committee under Tweel’s leadership and his ability to work effectively on their behalf?
Mayor Clifford Lee needs to stand up for city employees. He needs to stand up for the city’s female employees. He needs to remove Councillor Tweel as chairman of Human Resources.
Silence from the Mayor and Councillor Tweel is not an option
Tweel walks away from questions on stay-away order
The Guardian,
January 11th, 2010
Coun. Mitchell Tweel abruptly walked away from the media Monday night when asked to comment on the stay-away order that was issued against him last month in provincial court.
Tweel didn’t attend December’s public meeting of council so members of the media asked him to comment on the issue Monday night.
In December, Tweel signed an 810 recognizance in which he agreed to have no contact of any kind with an unidentified woman who sought the order.
Police received a complaint on Nov. 10 from the woman and, after investigating the complaint, police turned the matter over to the Crown attorney’s office to review.
Police said the victim feared for her safety.
When Tweel was asked about it Monday night, he abruptly walked away without saying a word.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Pee-wee Newest Adventure.... very funny!
Although the mega-famous Gwyneth Paltrow hosted "Saturday Night Live" this past Saturday night, Pee-wee Herman was the one who ended up stealing the show in this raucous Digital Short.
In it, Andy Samberg and the "Funhouse" star have a wild night out involving lots of shots, pranks that aren't really pranks, and a run-in with CNN's Anderson Cooper.
In it, Andy Samberg and the "Funhouse" star have a wild night out involving lots of shots, pranks that aren't really pranks, and a run-in with CNN's Anderson Cooper.
You may not have thought you'd ever hear sweet little Chairy swear, but that's just one of the ridiculous things that happens when you get Pee-wee Herman in your digital short.
On a side note, Pee-wee Herman hasn't hosted "SNL" since 1985. Isn't he due for a comeback?
“can you say Pompass”
I like this comment sent in by Anonymous “can you say Pompass”.... in reference to my most recent blog post “Shocking News... so why not me!!!...” which is about the upcoming Lieutenant Governor’s appointment...
I normally don't publish or respond to “Anonymous” posts as they are generally people hiding behind some veil and not brave enough to “come out”... but in this anonymous response I love the fact that you could read it either way... that the position of Lieutenant Governor is "Pompass" or that I am.... we can’t call on “Anonymous” to explain what he meant by his question but I’m sure most could agree with both views.... but if you happen to run into "Anonymous" can you please ask... can you "spell" Pompous?
I normally don't publish or respond to “Anonymous” posts as they are generally people hiding behind some veil and not brave enough to “come out”... but in this anonymous response I love the fact that you could read it either way... that the position of Lieutenant Governor is "Pompass" or that I am.... we can’t call on “Anonymous” to explain what he meant by his question but I’m sure most could agree with both views.... but if you happen to run into "Anonymous" can you please ask... can you "spell" Pompous?
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Now I Know How Rob McEachern Must Feel...
Well some of us may not have picked up on this but it seems a bit ironic that today's Guardian cartoon and also a Letter to the Editor happened to make it to the same page and I'm wondering if there is some sort of conspiracy here by those folks at the Guardian...It wasn't long ago that Rob was a "big fat-cat" businessman swinging around PEI with fairy tales of success and full faced into PEI's political trough applying for PNP's... and now after taking a beating by one our most colourful MLA's it appears Rob is looking for justice through our esteemed legal system but my guess is he should solicit our good friend Larry McGuire or Dean Shaw for some advice....
The Guardian Letters to the Editor
January 11, 2011
Denying answers is unacceptable
Editor:
When an elected official on the important public accounts committee asks a question on behalf of the electorate, the government must answer. When Harper attempted to keep documents secret from the Opposition parties he was challenged at the Supreme Court of Canada and Harper lost.
Our elected officials’ right are being violated routinely. I suggest that Robert Ghiz is in violation of the Canadian Constitution every time he has his puppet committee vote down any questions with teeth. Olive Crane has been denied answers.
This is absolutely unacceptable. With the overabundant number of lawyers in Charlottetown, are any savvy enough to offer an opinion that would betray my suggestion?
Rob McEachern
East Point
Monday, January 10, 2011
SHOCKING NEWS... so why not me!!!!
If anybody saw me leaving the Farmer's Market on Saturday morning then please let me know how I got home.... one minute I was sitting there enjoying myself embellishing others with great tales of Mitchell Tweel on his Campaign trail, when suddenly someone innocently plunked down The Guardian and right there before my very owns eyes was Wayne Thibodeau's inside scoop on the front runners for the soon to be announced PEI Lieutenant-Governor... I must have looked like a deer in the headlights as I scanned this "rag" looking for my picture... then I furiously read each page including the obituaries in search of my name, but with each fleeting moment I was becoming even more incoherent, to the point I was ready to fetch Paul MacNeill to bring some justice to this story...In shock, I muddled my way through the rest of Saturday and thought it only fitting that I should muster up enough energy to head down to the Lebanese New Year's bash at the Delta where surely I would find a camp of supporters... the Premier immediately recognized my grief and offered up the suggestion that if I could stomp Garth Staples out of the running then I may have a shot at it... but Shawn Murphy said knowing Jim Bagnall, he could be the dark horse, as his intellect may be the deciding factor... I was so discouraged that I couldn't even manage to get up and have a swing around the floor with the belly dancer, that's how stunned I felt...
Through the weekend I convinced myself that surely John Jeffery of CBC would get to the root of this obvious oversight and by midday Monday the pre-Compass reports would have pushed my story ahead of those wandering “lice” that Karen Mair has been on the lookout for... you can’t imagine how I’m feeling here after replaying Compass at least a half dozen times tonight and not even a mention... but when you really think about it, why wouldn't I have been the front runner as it was well known when I passed up the offer to be made a Senator, that I qualified such by letting them know I was "in-waiting" for the White House... I had even mentioned at that time that I was prepared to add a new swimming pool, a properly vented smoking room and a high pressure wash bay to the “big house” and all on my own tab...
But this is serious business when we’re talking about representing our good Queen of the Motherland and no one more than I (well maybe John Macnutt Esq.) appreciates the prerequisite of one’s qualifications to do this job properly... even with my credentials as a certified development bully I now know that I have to sweeten up the deal if I ever expect to manipulate my way to the top so first thing tomorrow I’m going to offer up Billy McGuire, the news editor of The Guardian, to be my Aide-de-Camp which should get me the proper media attention... then I’m going to make sure Ottawa knows that I’m prepared to develop a 9 hole executive golf course next to the big house if things go my way... I won’t need a salary so that would save our taxpayers some money and in the summers we could have Allan Rankin’s troupe run a midday socialist “Ceilidh” as the Princess and I would be at the cottage... hopefully this will do it?
If all else fails I just may call Lizzie myself and let her know that I’m prepared to swap the Porsche for a nice British built Lotus to keep out front for her and the Family to sport around in when they visit... and just think of the parties, so why not me?
Hunt is now on for new lieutenant-governor
January 8th, 2011
Wayne Thibodeau
GUARDIAN EXCLUSIVE!
Quietly, behind the scenes, a small group of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s closest confidants in Prince Edward Island are beginning the process to select the province’s next lieutenant-governor.
Barbara Hagerman’s term as Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, representative in Prince Edward Island comes to an end in July.
A replacement will likely be named in late June. Unless there is a federal election in the next six months and the Conservatives lose that election, the decision on who will be moving into Fanningbank, the lieutenant-governor’s official residence, will lie with Harper and his advisors, including Fisheries Minister Gail Shea, who is the minister responsible for Prince Edward Island.
Sources both in Charlottetown and in Ottawa say there is a long list of potential candidates being considered.
However, the prime minister’s office appears particularly interested in three candidates. They include veteran Summerside Mayor Basil Stewart, who ran unsuccessfully for the Conservatives in Egmont several years ago.
Also topping the list is Charlottetown businessman Fred Hyndman, who is managing director of Hyndman & Co. and chairman of the board of directors at UPEI.
There is also a lot of interest in Chief Darlene Bernard, the head of the Lennox Island First Nation. If named to the post, Bernard would be Prince Edward Island’s first aboriginal head of government.
Other names being considered are former Progressive Conservative MLAs Wes MacAleer and Pat Mella, Summerside lawyer Nancy Key, and Roger “Co-op” Arsenault, a community leader in Evangeline region of Prince Edward Island.
All three of the top contenders were surprised to even be considered.
Shea would not do an interview but the Egmont MP issued a carefully worded statement in an effort to fend off those who may want to lobby for the post, which sources say has already started.
“The current governor is doing a great job in her role and we are grateful for her service,” Shea said in her statement. “The prime minister will insure a suitable qualified individual will be appointed when her term comes to an end. It is customary as well for the prime minister to consult with the premier.”
There was a time when appointments of lieutenant governors was carefully weighed by political affiliation, particularly for the party that holds the prime minister’s office, as well as by religion and county lines.
For example, the rotation was usually between Prince, Queen and Kings counties in P.E.I. and between Roman Catholic and protestant. Sources say times have changed and most of those considerations, with the exception of political affiliation, are no longer considered.
Reid said it is an incredible honour and anybody given the opportunity to sit as lieutenant-governor should take that opportunity. “I believe it serves a very, very useful purpose,” she said. “I would think we would lose a lot of tradition if we lost the role of lieutenant-governor.”
Sunday, January 9, 2011
The Times, They Are A Changin’
"Fish to Fry"
by Tim Banks
Atlantic Business Magazine
January 8, 2011
You just have to love PEI. It’s a province “steeped in change”. And when I talk about change, I’m talking about serious life-altering changes.
PEI is officially the last province to introduce year-round Sunday shopping. It wasn’t easy. In fact, if you asked our politicians they would say it was the most dramatic thing to pass through the legislature this session.
I have to re-tell an experience I had a few years ago. I’m sitting in a typical Island farm kitchen, with the obligatory statue of Jesus hanging on the wall, reading The Guardian when I stumble upon an article which mentions that some Archbishop has decided that Catholics may eat meat on Fridays. Excited about this, I mention to my 90 year-old-relative that she’s free to eat what she pleases on Fridays. Before she could get the “Well, I don’t know, dear” out of her mouth, her son piped up: “If Christ came down off that cross and served it up to her, she’d not take a bite.”
I could have argued that it was a fact, since it was printed in The Guardian, but that wouldn’t have passed the Protestant Litmus test so it’s still fishcakes on Fridays here.
While the rest of you were dealing with the troubles of the Irish economy and bombings in Korea, our legislature focused entirely on Sunday shopping. The media were at the top of their game, combining their arsenal towards covering the most important issue since allowing canned pop on the Island. Forget that there was already three years of political wrangling to let Island stores open Sundays from May until Christmas – this bill called for complete change. What shaped up might be up there with the Treaty of Versailles.
Here’s how it played out: the Tory Leader of the Opposition brought forward a Private Member’s Bill amending the Retail Business Holidays Act and the media gleefully went door-to-door, soliciting opinions from the public. Never mind that just a year earlier a full Legislative Committee had brought forward a recommendation to government to keep the stores open… which they didn’t follow.
The name calling and banter started rising from the floor of the House. The government pitted rural against urban and religion against business. Finally, a breakthrough, when the Premier suggested a “free vote” not along Party lines. It was an unusual decision, one which hadn’t happened since they allowed Catholics a vote. And smart on the Premier.
The result was a 13-13 tie in the Legislature – and Speaker of the House, Kathleen Casey, broke the tie in favour of Sunday shopping (thank God). Shortly before the vote, the Opposition Leader sprained her ankle and a wily cabinet minister suggested it might have been an act of God. We also had a church minister writing to the newspaper editor calling for a protest in front of the legislature. The third reading of the bill stood, which is great news for you folks visiting this winter as you can warm up in our inviting stores – if they decide to open.
The best news is that the bulk of this silliness being debated in our legislature is being missed by the youth of our province. Changes in technology are outpacing old forms of media and our youth are just oblivious to what our politicians are up to.
Only two Liberal MLAs took to social media to ask constituents about Sunday shopping. Backbencher Cynthia Dunsford and Education minister Doug Currie asked via Facebook and Twitter. It appears their “public” findings were overwhelmingly in favour of Sunday shopping, with most of their feedback coming from a younger crowd who engaged in this debate through new media.
Surely these politicians will look back at this debate as a wasted effort of what could have been time used in improving our education and health care system, leaving the business of business to the free enterprise marketplace and the choice of change to others. Our youth are apathetic towards our politicians. If we’re going to engage them in debate, it’s not going to be about changing store hours as much as it’s about changing the world and our way of thinking. There is a youth resurgence in Bob Dylan’s tune The Times They Are A-Changin’. Maybe it’s time for us to follow that tune.
by Tim Banks
Atlantic Business Magazine
January 8, 2011
You just have to love PEI. It’s a province “steeped in change”. And when I talk about change, I’m talking about serious life-altering changes.
PEI is officially the last province to introduce year-round Sunday shopping. It wasn’t easy. In fact, if you asked our politicians they would say it was the most dramatic thing to pass through the legislature this session.
I have to re-tell an experience I had a few years ago. I’m sitting in a typical Island farm kitchen, with the obligatory statue of Jesus hanging on the wall, reading The Guardian when I stumble upon an article which mentions that some Archbishop has decided that Catholics may eat meat on Fridays. Excited about this, I mention to my 90 year-old-relative that she’s free to eat what she pleases on Fridays. Before she could get the “Well, I don’t know, dear” out of her mouth, her son piped up: “If Christ came down off that cross and served it up to her, she’d not take a bite.”
I could have argued that it was a fact, since it was printed in The Guardian, but that wouldn’t have passed the Protestant Litmus test so it’s still fishcakes on Fridays here.
While the rest of you were dealing with the troubles of the Irish economy and bombings in Korea, our legislature focused entirely on Sunday shopping. The media were at the top of their game, combining their arsenal towards covering the most important issue since allowing canned pop on the Island. Forget that there was already three years of political wrangling to let Island stores open Sundays from May until Christmas – this bill called for complete change. What shaped up might be up there with the Treaty of Versailles.
Here’s how it played out: the Tory Leader of the Opposition brought forward a Private Member’s Bill amending the Retail Business Holidays Act and the media gleefully went door-to-door, soliciting opinions from the public. Never mind that just a year earlier a full Legislative Committee had brought forward a recommendation to government to keep the stores open… which they didn’t follow.
The name calling and banter started rising from the floor of the House. The government pitted rural against urban and religion against business. Finally, a breakthrough, when the Premier suggested a “free vote” not along Party lines. It was an unusual decision, one which hadn’t happened since they allowed Catholics a vote. And smart on the Premier.
The result was a 13-13 tie in the Legislature – and Speaker of the House, Kathleen Casey, broke the tie in favour of Sunday shopping (thank God). Shortly before the vote, the Opposition Leader sprained her ankle and a wily cabinet minister suggested it might have been an act of God. We also had a church minister writing to the newspaper editor calling for a protest in front of the legislature. The third reading of the bill stood, which is great news for you folks visiting this winter as you can warm up in our inviting stores – if they decide to open.
The best news is that the bulk of this silliness being debated in our legislature is being missed by the youth of our province. Changes in technology are outpacing old forms of media and our youth are just oblivious to what our politicians are up to.
Only two Liberal MLAs took to social media to ask constituents about Sunday shopping. Backbencher Cynthia Dunsford and Education minister Doug Currie asked via Facebook and Twitter. It appears their “public” findings were overwhelmingly in favour of Sunday shopping, with most of their feedback coming from a younger crowd who engaged in this debate through new media.
Surely these politicians will look back at this debate as a wasted effort of what could have been time used in improving our education and health care system, leaving the business of business to the free enterprise marketplace and the choice of change to others. Our youth are apathetic towards our politicians. If we’re going to engage them in debate, it’s not going to be about changing store hours as much as it’s about changing the world and our way of thinking. There is a youth resurgence in Bob Dylan’s tune The Times They Are A-Changin’. Maybe it’s time for us to follow that tune.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
