THE DECISION OR PART THEREOF

On two full pages. Leading to the decision are five whereases. A six bullet explanation follows.
The decision itself occupies nine and a half lines of type.

It reads:

Therefore

It is the DECISION of my office that this statement of complaint, as is, is unacceptable and that as is, no investigation or inquiry shall take place. The complaint is ILL-FORMED in that some of its enumerated signatories have refused to sign and have indeed repudiated the use of their names. It is INCOMPLETE in that the impacts of its allegations upon the behaviour, duties, and/or reputation of councillors(or the organization) themselves is absent. Query oo8 is INAPPROPRIATE that the way it was crafted, politicized and communicated, may be, and be seen to be, wholly political.Explanation of this last test point can be seen in the many tests or measures of political interference that were raised in my e-mail of July 30th in direct communication to the proponents.

The decision was made on the 5th of August. It was in the hands of the Deputy Clerk, Acting clerk for the previous week and a half, on that date.

The process required it be provided by that officer to the complainants and to the councillor whose conduct was of concern.

Despite a visit to the town hall, the decision was not provided to the Councillor whose conduct was said to be of concern. It was refused. By the Acting Chief Administrative Officer, Town Solicitor Christopher Cooper, after no less than two consultations with the Mayor.

The Mayor later stated on camera it was intended the public would receive the decision at the same time.

That was not a decision for the Mayor to make.

The "Special" meeting ,called before notice the decision had been made and forwarded to the appropriate official , was held on Thursday August 6th.

Reference in the decision is made to a communication made to the proponents on July 30th.
to "the many tests and measures of degree of political interference"

Reference in the resolution on Aug 6th, adopted by the proponents to the complaint, is made to "repeated efforts to persuade the Commissioner "

Clearly, there was interference in the Commissioner's powers and authority prior to the decision and prior to the meeting at which the six proponents' of the complaint decided .to 'strip the powers and authority" of the Town's recently contracted Integrity Commissioner.

From its beginning, this Blog has provided factual information to readers. If I make a mistake, I correct it. If I indulge myself in personal criticism of a colleague, I withdraw it.

The Blog provides my thoughts on everything I write about.

It tells no-one what to think. It provides raw material, told with my particular bent and invites readers to form their own conclusions.

I ask nothing more.

In a free, civilized , robust community, what more can be asked.

We have it all.

All we need, is to determine how to use it.