"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Sunday 9 January 2011

Logic Versus Speculation

Anonymoose has left a new comment on your post "Another Thought":

"A written argument must stand or fall on organisation and logic. "

Oh yes, I couldn't agree more with this statement.

Speaking of logic. A little further on, regarding the Morris lawsuit, you say "It was surprising how many people were willing to take the easy route. Without even knowing who signed the contract, they were all too willing to say the town should pay the legal fees."


Then further still, in the same post, you say "In my judgment, the ad should be cancelled immediately. But that might reflect badly on the municipality. It may not even be possible to cancel without paying for it anyway. It's probably a contract. "


Now please explain the logic you use to justify NOT paying the first bill, but feeling compelled to pay the second. How will reneging on the first not also "reflect poorly on the town"?

Both, I am sure, were duly entered contracts by someone with the authority to do so on behalf of the town.

Are you saying an employee acted improperly by doing so? And if so, are you really saying that this employee's behaviour should be discussed in open council?

All that being said, I do have to agree with the other commenter, and commend you for being so willing to shoulder as much criticism as you do.

*****


How is it you can state with certainty the contracts were duly entered by someone with authority to do so on behalf of the town ?

I am a Councillor and I cant say it. I was not at the meeting behind closed doors. This Council must still be briefed about what actually happened in the early hours of September 15th before a decision can be made about whether all or part of the legal expenses for the first contract will be paid from the public purse.

I know of no meeting to authorize litigation be undertaken and funds provided for the purpose.

I hope for full public disclosure and a vote on the question.

We already know one Councillor repudiated his vote in favour of the open-ended resolution. Three others are in the public record as having had no idea of litigation against three residents. Two others did not attend the meeting because of the belief, a critical comment against the Mayor, however severe, was not a corporate matter.

That makes six councillors who did not vote for that action.I am not certain of Councillors MacEachern or Wilson. I am not aware of any statement to the contrary.

I am certain of the extent of the former Mayor's involvement. To make things fuzzier,initial action was filed by Mayor Morris. A second proceeding removed the title of Mayor from the file.

One other thing needs to be considered. There is no record of approval from Council for funds to be spent for litigation. No report stating funds were available in a specific budget. How could there be?

The town has a purchasing procedure policy. No member of Council has authority to make expenditures under the policy. Only formal direction from Council allows staff to make expenditures. Except in particular circumstances, department heads have authority to spend up to specific limits. The amount is stated in the policy.

So, you see. many questions need to be answered before a decision can be made.

The public are entitled to know exactly how such an abhorrent event came about.

It is incumbent on this Council to make sure that happens.No I don't think we should spend millions on an inquiry. As yet, no money has changed hands.

Let the chips fall where they may.

When things go well, politicians take the credit. When all hell breaks loose, politicians carry the can.

It was ever thus.

Politics are not for the faint of heart.

******

Post script:

I do not consider comments that disagree with my position as criticism,

They are simply a difference of opinion.

I welcome the discussion. If they fail to persuade me it's probably because I have a better handle on the in depth information. If I fail to persuade them it measn I'm not as good as I thought I was and need to do better.

Either way, the argument is worth having.

No comments: