Mayor Bob Bratina - Page 3

SteelTown · #1 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 8:15 PM**

Uh why do we need a military consultant?

markbarbera · #2 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 8:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Uh why do we need a military consultant?

Perhaps Bratina is hiring a part-time military consultant to assist the Mayor's office to properly prepare for the various War of 1812 bicentennial commemorative events. I think you just posted something about them earlier today, didn't you?

As Mayor he will be officiating some pretty high profile events over the next couple of years, and he will be requiring advice on proper military protocol and historical context on the various events. Seems to me that Elms is well qualified for that advisory role.

SteelTown · #3 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 9:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Perhaps Bratina is hiring a part-time military consultant to assist the Mayor's office to properly prepare for the various War of 1812 bicentennial commemorative events. I think you just posted something about them earlier today, didn't you?

As Mayor he will be officiating some pretty high profile events over the next couple of years, and he will be requiring advice on proper military protocol and historical context on the various events. Seems to me that Elms is well qualified for that advisory role.

I'm sure the Hamilton Historical Board could provide free knowledge and tips.

flar · #4 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 10:29 PM**

Or he could go down to the Legion and ask the guys there.

markbarbera · #5 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 11:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I'm sure the Hamilton Historical Board could provide free knowledge and tips.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flar

Or he could go down to the Legion and ask the guys there.

The thing about free advice is it's usually priced at its exact value.

Honestly, the Mayor obviously feels he has a requirement for his expertise and he is well within his office budget to hire him. The 1812 bicentennial events are going to be seen internationally so he wants to make sure he does things right. Nothing more than petty squelching going on here.

flar · #6 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 8:17 PM**

Hamilton is preparing to make a move on Toronto. The first step will be to take back Burlington from the GTA.

CaptainKirk · #7 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 8:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by flar

Hamilton is preparing to make a move on Toronto. The first step will be to take back Burlington from the GTA.

I told you not to reveal too much too soon!

Anyway, now that the cat's out of the bag, it's not so much a war on cars per se, but rather a war on just Fords.

SteelTown · #8 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 8:25 PM**

Can't believe Sam Merulla called himself as a third person, UGH!

Tony · #9 Posted **Nov 29, 2011, 9:09 PM**

Woo-hoo! Way to waste money on consultants with little to nothing to do with the role that municipal governments play! When are you guys hiring the CSA Extraterrestrial Contact Adviser?

SteelTown · #10 Posted **Dec 1, 2011, 2:19 PM**

http://www.thespec.com/opinion/carto...toon-for-dec-1

LOL

durandy · #11 Posted **Dec 3, 2011, 4:14 PM**

meanwhile in Hamilton the mayor and media are at it again...

http://www.thespec.com/opinion/colum...his-leadership

While I agree with many of Dreschel's comments here, I don't know how they can justify printing this. Dreschel alludes to an "alleged pushing incident" in an unbelievably casual manner, as though that wouldn't be a huge deal. And quotes an offhand remark by Peggy Chapman in a way clearly designed to sow strife in Bratina's office.

markbarbera · #12 Posted **Dec 3, 2011, 4:26 PM**

Mothership Torstar must think the Toronto Star's acrimonious relationship with Ford has been good for newspaper sales, because they are doing their damndest to try to create the same destructive dynamic here. New nadir for journalism.

markbarbera · #13 Posted **Dec 3, 2011, 4:33 PM**

Mothership Torstar must think the Toronto Star's acrimonious relationship with Ford has been good for newspaper sales, because they are doing their damndest to try to create the same destructive dynamic here. New nadir for journalism.

thistleclub · #14 Posted **Dec 3, 2011, 6:31 PM**

Pundits will be pundits, and politicians will be politicians. Nobody in this equation has changed their stripes as far as I can see.

SteelTown · #15 Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 10:47 PM**

BREAKING: Just confirmed with Mayor Bratina that his chief of staff, Peggy Chapman, is getting a $30,000 raise in 2012.

markbarbera · #16 Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 11:03 PM**

Emma Reilly tweeting jibberish again I see. Here's hoping the full story she will post for the spec will more accurately convey the story. After all there's always a first for everything.

From what I understand, the pay raise was initiated by the city's HR dept to bring it more in line with the pay level staff enjoyed under previous administrations. The raise was not initiated by the mayor or Chapman.

Just thought I'd mention that before the hysterical class start huffing and puffing on cue.

PS: If one is to quote tweets in here as a source of news, shouldn't one cite the source of that tweet, or at least acknowledge it's something posted to twitter?

Dr Awesomesauce · #17 Posted **Dec 7, 2011, 3:26 AM**

^Wow, you are sooooooo in love with Bratina it's not even funny. By my calculations that must put you in the 70-90 age bracket, am I right?

Oh well, he does have a beautiful voice...

mattgrande · #18 Posted **Dec 7, 2011, 5:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

BREAKING: Just confirmed with Mayor Bratina that his chief of staff, Peggy Chapman, is getting a $30,000 raise in 2012.

I wish I got a 30% raise...

SteelTown · #19 Posted **Dec 7, 2011, 1:57 PM**

Bob Bratina takes questions from The Spectator

See thespec.com Wednesday at 1 p.m. for live video of The Spectator’s editorial board meeting with Mayor Bob Bratina.

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/ar...-the-spectator

matt602 · #20 Posted **Dec 7, 2011, 5:46 PM**

The Spec made a good point that Chapman makes more than the 2 previous chiefs of staffs had. DiIanni's barely made over $100, 000 and Eisenberger's was not registered on the "over $100, 000" list. What exactly are we paying for here? What makes her so much more valuable than her last two counterparts? Why does she deserve a raise that is worth almost as much as I make in a year? At a time when the city is stressing fiscal responsibility, why is HR handing out the raises like it appears to be?