Response to My Response to a Question

In my in-box his morning I have received the following anonymous comment re Knowles Crescent:

Perhaps a lawsuit would have been a lot more expensive
The super lowered road created a dangerous slope for my property.
We got what was due to us.
We got the point that you thought we should shut up and suffer or pay for it ourselves.
Good for us, them that mess up pay. Not us.
Glad to have a new director


Now.....what should I do with this. Publish it and let it speak for itself. Reject it. Or continue the dialogue. The Knowles Crescent issue was in September 2007. An offshoot is still current.

During the Saga, the Director of Public Works was denigrated in a formal meeting with the mayor presiding. He was pushed aside at the request of some residents. A consultant was hired to negotiate with the same residents and $60k of taxpayers money went out the door. In addition to the million spent constructing the road and underground services.

The value of private properties was undoubtedly improved by the million samolis of public investment. Knowles Crescent went from a semi-rural road ,with ditch and culvert storm drainage and gravel shoulders to as pleasant and pretty a street scape as any that might be found in town. In times past such a project would have meant a local improvement tax on each property.

Council's decision prompted my comment that had I voted to dole out that extra money to a handful of home-owners .I would have considered myself in breach of my Oath of Office .It was a reflection of the power of my conviction, that the community was not well-served by the decision.

I took my advice from the Acting Director of Public Works , charged by the town with responsibility to advise on matters within his area of professional expertise.He had held his post as engineer in the employ of the Town for a number of years and shepherded many similar projects to successful and satisfactory completion. There was sufficient assurance to me of his competence and integrity.

The town is responsible for only that part of driveway on public property. The policy however is sufficiently flexible that private properties are not negatively affected by re-construction.

Regency Acres is almost fifty years old. Knowles Crescent is not the first street to be re-constructed to a vastly improved standard by replacing ditches and culverts and gravel shoulders with underground services. A sidewalk was also an option but it was refused.

The idea that any property-owner "suffered"as a result of the project is utterly ludicrous I was the only Councillor strongly opposed to the decision to hand out cheques to individuals. I am confident I was not the only resident or neighbour who resented paying for it in my taxes .

My comment resulted in the Mayor declaring an" emergency "on another pretext and retaining the services of lawyer,George Rust D'Eye which in turn engendered a legal bill of at least $16,200 and a recommendation that Council adopt a Code of Conduct and retain the services of an Integrity Commissioner.

The Code of Conduct was approved on June 24th 2008. An Integrity Commissioner was appointed in October 2008. As yet a contract remains to be signed .

The service is not of course free. Indications are the complaint process is not fully understood . by a number of councillors. There has been conspicuous reluctance on the part of some to accept instruction. How things will evolve from this point on remains to be seen.

And the beat goes on.... la-di-adi-ah