From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the City of Calgary to scrap the Calgary Arts Development Authority after it spent $65,000 on a telephone line to the Bow River.

“If someone wants to listen to a river, they can go sit next to one, but the City of Calgary should not force taxpayers to pay for this,” said Kris Sims, CTF Alberta Director. “If phoning a river floats your boat, you do you, but don’t force your neighbour to pay for your art choices.”

The City of Calgary spent $65,194 of taxpayers’ money for an art project dubbed “Reconnecting to the Bow” to set up a telephone line so people could call the Bow River and listen to the sound of water.

The project is running between September 2024 and December 2025, according to documents obtained by the CTF.

The art installation is a rerun of a previous version set up back in 2014.

Emails obtained by the CTF show the bureaucrats responsible for the newest version of the project wanted a new local 403 area code phone number instead of an 1-855 number to “give the authority back to the Bow,” because “the original number highlighted a proprietary and commercial relationship with the river.”

Further correspondence obtained by the CTF shows the city did not want its logo included in the displays, stating the “City of Calgary (does NOT want to have its logo on the artworks or advertisements).”

Taxpayers pay about $19 million per year for the Calgary Arts Development Authority. That’s equivalent to the total property tax bill for about 7,000 households.

Calgary bureaucrats also expressed concern the project “may not be received well, perceived as a waste of money or simply foolish.”

“That city hall employee was pointing out the obvious: This is a foolish waste of taxpayers’ money and this slush fund should be scrapped,” said Sims. “Artists should work with willing donors for their projects instead of mooching off city hall and forcing taxpayers to pay for it.”

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Katelynn Richardson

“The Supreme Court put to rest any question about whether fuel manufacturers have a right to challenge unlawful electric vehicle mandates”

The Supreme Court sided Friday with oil companies seeking to challenge California’s electric vehicle regulations.

In a 7-2 ruling, the court allowed energy producers to continue their lawsuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to approve California regulations that require manufacturing more electric vehicles.

“The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion. “In light of this Court’s precedents and the evidence before the Court of Appeals, the fuel producers established Article III standing to challenge EPA’s approval of the California regulations.”

Kavanaugh noted that “EPA has repeatedly altered its legal position on whether the Clean Air Act authorizes California regulations targeting greenhouse-gas emissions from new motor vehicles” between Presidential administrations.

“This case involves California’s 2012 request for EPA approval of new California regulations,” he wrote. “As relevant here, those regulations generally require automakers (i) to limit average greenhouse-gas emissions across their fleets of new motor vehicles sold in the State and (ii) to manufacture a certain percentage of electric vehicles as part of their vehicle fleets.”

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals previously rejected the challenge, finding the producers lacked standing to sue.

“The Supreme Court put to rest any question about whether fuel manufacturers have a right to challenge unlawful electric vehicle mandates,” American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) President and CEO Chet Thompson said in a statement.

“California’s EV mandates are unlawful and bad for our country,” he said. “Congress did not give California special authority to regulate greenhouse gases, mandate electric vehicles or ban new gas car sales—all of which the state has attempted to do through its intentional misreading of statute.”