[Keith P.]

It is not a matter of every nice thing equaling "frivolous" spending. But HRM in particular spends frivolously all the time. A few years ago the province did an inventory of museums around the province and the number was staggering. Most only had a handful of visitors a year and all were on the dole from the province and other levels of govt in addition to local fundraising trying to keep the lights on. Keeping that number of places open is clearly unsustainable and foolhardy. Supplying something for which there is little to no demand is simply wasteful when other needs are sorely lacking due to shortages of funding.

HRM's $50 million library would be no less of a library if they only spent $35 or $40 million to build it. The $15 million oval which closes on many winter days due to weather conditions would have perhaps been better realized with a more practical design. The entire bike lane and flyover debacle is another example. The list goes on and on. Frivolous spending is frivolous by definition, not just because I say so. Is there a need for municipal museum in a restored heritage building in a location that is less than ideal? I would hope that a full analysis of cost and demand for such a facility would occur first. Otherwise it is another $4 million gardener's cottage across from the Public Gardens, just on a much larger scale, a "nice thing" that soaked up a great many tax dollars despite having no defined use or need. Or an $80 million Forum project that costs nearly twice as much as the alternative, just to have a pair of replica walls constructed outside while delivering less space and poorer service to the community than the original.