Yeah, alright. i over simplified. it doesn’t suck, but, at the same time it does not have the host of services we require for the 21st century. And Rogers cable internet was far better then Citytel ADSL when i was back east. I’ve been told by city staff that the improvements could give us premium service with four times the speed of what we have now (Consider the source and take that with a grain of salt, of course_) I think sometimes people are just opposed to things like this because “privatization” has become a dirty word - it ain’t the same as fee for service at the hospital and it really should have been made a corporation 30 years ago. What really is the downside (even if they one day tried to sell CityTel we’d get a referendum then and you could vote against it only it won’t screw up this expansion deal) other than paranoid fantasies about evil corporations hiding things from the public?
Are you talking internet services? Cellular? Landline?
**VMS wrote:
**
I would imagine that the combination of business clientele, (hopefully) increasing population and tourists would mean we’ll need better of all three eventually. More bandwidth (large transfer of video and data, telconferencing, etc.) bigger cellular networks (what happens with 5,000 cruise ship passengers in town during say Seafest for instance and everyone tries to use their cell?) and perhaps even more land lines, I dunno what the city’s capacity is.
[quote=“CrazyMike”]
Except that we voted these people in as part of a democratic process. I see your point Miguel, I’m just not sure I agree with you.
Mike[/quote]
I understand what you’re saying here. But at the same time, CityTel is a business, and businesses have to make decisions quickly and effectively. Not everyone on City Council has a business background, and with all due respect to them, they may not necessarily have the business experinece to even understand the ramifications of choices they have to make, let alone make the better choices.
Not to mention the fact that there is a danger that members of City Council may in fact make decisions based purely on politics. Granted this is highly unlikely, but I prefere not to take that chance.
Bottom line: CityTel is a business. It makes money. It’s not like other City departments where it has to be subsidized by tax revenue to survive. I believe it’s best to leave business decisions in the hands of businesspeople.
[quote=“Tricky-J”]**VMS wrote:
**
I would imagine that the combination of business clientele, (hopefully) increasing population and tourists would mean we’ll need better of all three eventually. More bandwidth (large transfer of video and data, telconferencing, etc.) bigger cellular networks (what happens with 5,000 cruise ship passengers in town during say Seafest for instance and everyone tries to use their cell?) and perhaps even more land lines, I dunno what the city’s capacity is.[/quote]
But until they actually have that customer base, it’s hard to justify spending so much money for the infrastructure, especially when CityTel probably doesn’t have the working capital needed to do so.
[quote=“Stardog Champion”]I understand what you’re saying here. But at the same time, CityTel is a business, and businesses have to make decisions quickly and effectively. Not everyone on City Council has a business background, and with all due respect to them, they may not necessarily have the business experinece to even understand the ramifications of choices they have to make, let alone make the better choices.
Not to mention the fact that there is a danger that members of City Council may in fact make decisions based purely on politics. Granted this is highly unlikely, but I prefere not to take that chance.
[/quote]
So you’re saying we can’t always trust what City Council says, and can’t always levae every decision to them?
Then do you think we should leave this decision up to them?
Oh, did the business people vote? I thought it was council that decided Citytel should become a corporation. But Council doesn’t know business? Or does it? My head is going to explode!
Which decisions can we trust council with? The decision to make Citytel a corporation? Or not?
Seriously, I don’t mind Citytel being a corporation, but the bottom line is that it exists for the benefit of its owner, not for the benefit of business or capitalism or whatever. The city is the owner, not “business” or anybody else…
I think you’re missing my point. Politicians don’t necessarily have the knowledge and experience required to make informed business decisions. That doesn’t mean they’re incompetent people, nor does it mean that they would intentionally steer the ship the wrong way.
The problem is that when a company like CityTel is forced to run every major decision past the polticians, many of whom have a rudimentary understanding of business at best, there’s a good chance that, however good their intentions may be, they would make poor decisions that could hurt the business dramatically.
I get the sense that you don’t like business or capitalism. That’s fine, and you’re certainly entitled to your opionion. But what I’m talking about is leaving the business decisions–and regardless of its owner, CityTel is a business–in the hands of those who are best equipped to handle them.
Not only business savvy and knowledge but a somewhat higher degree of technical knowledge is always a plus too.
[quote=“VMS”]
Yea and this is bad why? Citytel cant go after private money to upgrade their infrustructure, the city cant afford it. And as it stands now, citytel is forbidden by law, by the municipal act, not to be able to go after private financing. By incorporating they can.
Also, if the city were to go bankrupt, council is dissolved and a person appointed by the province is brought in to run to the city. This would hurt citytel in a big way. As an incorporated company, the city going bankrupt, or in recievership in effect, it would not affect citytel.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more!!
Stardog Champion wrote:
Most of the general public does not have a business background or the experience to make a good judgement call in a referendum. We elect politicians to look after our affairs. At some point we have to let them do what they were elected to do. Do we have to like it??? No! There is nothing stopping us from not re-electing them in November. I can see having a referendum for some issues but this is not one of them.
[quote=“VMS”]
Not only business savvy and knowledge but a somewhat higher degree of technical knowledge is always a plus too.[/quote]
Exactly. And again, the reason I think it would be better for CityTel to be incorporated is because they can run the business more efficiently without having to approve everything they do through people who really aren’t in a position to understand the decisions they make.
Plus, as you were saying earlier, being incorporated would allow CityTel to acquire private capital to expand much faster than they could if they had to rely on tax revenue alone.
Well, that’s just wrong. I love capitalism. I think that you can’t have it both ways, though. You either want the politicians to make business decisions or you don’t.
Making Citytel a corporation is a decision made by politicians. You think it’s a good decision? Well, then your argument that politicians can’t make good decisions is invalid.
I think that Citytel would be great as a corporation, as long as the interests of its owners is first. The owners are me and you, not “business” and not some American shareholder.
So you think they don’t understand the decision they made to suggest that Citytel become a corporation? That’s the attitude I don’t like. We own this company, we should have a say in how it’s run.
Saying that these people have no business sense and shouldn’t have any say in how the company is run isn’t right. Especially if you want us to blindly trust them (without a referendum) in telling us that the company should become a corporation. Either they have some business sense (and we should follow their advice and make Citytel a corporation), or they don’t have any business sense (and then their advice to make Citytel a corporation is suspect, isn’t it?).
There are a lot of good arguments to be made for making it a corporation, but “City Council doesn’t know business” is not a good argument, because that argument is a circular one that defeats itself.
I have no problem with it becoming a “crown corporation” type of company, as long as the number one priority is to serve the wishes of its owners.
ie: Citytel comes up with some big plan to expand to Northeastern BC. What’s in it for Rupert? Nothing? Then don’t do it. If there’s something in it for us, the owners, then go for it.
I’m also not too concerned about it being a corporation as long as there’s no chance that the city will sell the shares into private hands. Then the prime motivation of the company won’t be what’s best for Rupert, but what’s best for some anonymous American shareholder.
Citytel doesn’t rely on tax revenue. Just the opposite – having Citytel means we pay less taxes.
Acquiring private capital means selling shares? If so, no, I’m not in favour of that. Bank loans? Sure, no problem. Again, as long as we, the owners, don’t lose control. You and I own a part of Citytel. Do you want somebody who you think doesn’t have any business sense (Council) giving away your part of Citytel?
Drop the “Council is dumb” argument, and it will make more sense.
i love citytel, why one reason no caps on uploads and downloads, i would have to be a millionar to have anyother service. in the last few days i have downloaded over 90 + gigs, x that a week x that a month…we talking talking tera bites… Dude you just cant do that with cable or telus.
I just wish I could keep a stable connection without sacrificing speed to do it. If I go with the normal “uncapped mode” I get awesome speeds but my modem randomly resets or locks up whenever it feels like. No big deal I guess for things like websurfing or even downloading (since bittorrent will recover on its own). It drives me nuts though when I’m playing games. I’ll just get into a good round of BF2 and get kicked out. The only solution, Citytel tells me, is to downshift the speed to stabablize the connection.
They tell me it’s because I live up on Jamaica which is at the outlying ends of the service.
Mike
Quite the opposite. I think they know exactly what they’re doing. See my comments below for elaboration.
Again, you’re missing my point. I’m NOT saying that City Council is dumb. That would be like saying that I think someone’s dumb because they should leave their medical decisions up to a doctor rather than trying to diagnose thier health problems by themselves. Doctors are experts in such affairs. I trust them, and with good reason.
In the same way, I think that City Council, by considering a move toward incorporation, is admitting that busines/techinical matters are things in which they don’t have the expertise to make decisions. For example, how many members of City Council would understand concepts like economies of scale? Or elasticity of demand? Or the massive amounts of technical information required to run a telephone and Internet business that even I don’t understand?
And here’s a hint: I just admitted that there are issues I don’t understand. That’s not the same as saying that I’m dumb. I’m not. And anyone who knows me will tell you the same thing. But I don’t know everything.
And when I don’t know something, I ask those who do. If it’s a matter that’s vital, I put those decisions in the hands of those who do.
And most importantly, I know when I’m in over my head, and it’s time for me to step out of the picture. Again, this is not an admission of stupidity or failure. On the contrary, I think it’s an intelligent decision to admit that someone’s not equipped to handle something and to leave it to someone who is.
Nor do I. I’m more concerned about requiring the organization to run every major decision by City Council before going ahead with it, simply because it unneccesarily ties their hands. Just like we elect politicians to make decisions for us, they should in turn, (with great care of course), choose people who are best suited for running this business.
[quote]
Well, that’s just wrong. I love capitalism. I think that you can’t have it both ways, though. You either want the politicians to make business decisions or you don’t.
Making Citytel a corporation is a decision made by politicians. You think it’s a good decision? Well, then your argument that politicians can’t make good decisions is invalid.
I think that Citytel would be great as a corporation, as long as the interests of its owners is first. The owners are me and you, not “business” and not some American shareholder.[/quote]
I see where the miscommunication came from, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I never said that City Council is not equipped to make good decisions. In fact, I think that incorporation–under the right circumstances of course–is a very good move on City Council’s part. Especially since City Council already has a lot on their plate, and will probably have even more when the port opens up.
My concern is simply that there will probably be times where important business or technological decisions have to be made, but because of a miscommunication of some difficult business or technical point, the Council may misjudge it and deny something that they would have approved had they understood everything.
And again, this is not saying that City Council is too dumb to understand the issues. It’s just that it can be very difficult for people who are very well versed in business or technical issues to see those issues from the point of view of those who don’t. Techies, for example, quite often don’t realize how much (or little) technical knowledge the other side has. As such, they either skip vital details, or get so bogged down in minutiae that they can no longer see the forest for the trees.
Therefore, I think it’s far more effective to leave the business and technical decisions to those who are best equpped to handle them. As such, I believe City Council’s moves toward incorporation are all the more a good idea.
Keep the money in the community? Yes. Keep control of the company local? Absolutely. Ensure that the decisions keep with the priciple of what’s best for Prince Rupert? Of course. All I’m saying is that CityTel should be allowed to make those decisions without having to report every decision to City Council and ask for approval.
Surely, there must be a way to allow the managers of CityTel to make their decisions without requiring approval for everything, whlie at the same time ensuring the decisions benefit the people of Prince Rupert first.
For the record, those who are signing the petition are either against the incorporation or are for selling CityTel, and everything in between.
How many of you knew there were public input meetings this week at City Hall? Tuesday at noon and Thursday at 5:30pm. How many, even if they knew would have been able to attend these meetings? Why wasn’t there more advertising about these meetings?
In the Daily News story it mentions that City Hall will be appointing board members. If you think this process will be devoid of politics, you are sadly mistaken. It will only serve to further hide the political machinations from public view.
[quote=“CrazyMike”]And?
You see usually people provide some sort of opinion and/or argument why they encourage people to do something. Unless of course you’re just providing the link for information purposes, in which case I apologise. It just seemed to me you were hoping that people would just blindly sign.
Mike[/quote]
Yes, I’m only interested in people making informed decisions. I accept your apology and apologize for calling you numbnuts.
Well I knew there were meetings, could have attended, but chose not to. I saw notices for the meeting in the Daily News and heard about it on the radio.
What more would you have them do? Drive through the streets with a big megaphone strapped to the roof of a car like in the Blues Brothers?
Mike
I didn’t hear about it on the radio as I never listen to it, and the only reason it was in the Daily News was that I mentioned it to a reporter who also didn’t know about it.
Well assuming for a moment that you were the only reason it got into the paper… It’s commendable that you helped the situation along.
However it got there and on the radio, it was there and still doesn’t answer my question. What more chould have/ should have been done? A door to door campaign? Flyers dropped from aircraft?
Mike