Cameras On The Blink

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Still On Water":

Evelyn, Can you tell us why the town council meeting was not televised last night? I was hoping to watch it live to see how the apology to council by the CFO would continue to play out. Can you give us an update on that?

***************
Cameras were not in the Council Chamber last night. Apparently they had a breakdown.

So the  CFO's apology to Council did not continue  to play out. The Mayor covered for the bureaucrats nicely.

I  asked to be recognized on a Question of Privilege. The  procedure   allows a Councillor to declare they have been offended by the  comment or comments of another member. It's a  rule that permits civility to prevail. It keeps the seed of  personal  resentment and animosity from taking root. Without it, relationships quickly degenerate to  the level of the gutter. An environment  which  besmirches everyone exposed. No-one shows well.

There is  no  procedure  to permit staff  to speak during a council debate unless directed to do so by the presiding member. There are therefore no rules of order governing staff  participation  in the public debate.

My statement was as follows:

Mr. Mayor,

You invited me to clarify a comment I made in the course of debate  in the last Council meeting.

The question was re-consideration of Council's decision to adopt  a Bylaw to increase water rates .

The debate was disrupted by a staff person who has since apologized for showing disrespect to Council. The chief Administrative Officer  expressed deep disappointment at the time that I would make an accusation of a criminal nature .

I understand  scrutiny of the transcript of my comments has established I made no such accusation.However, I am happy to provide the context of  my comment as you requested.

Let me first say Mr. Mayor, I have a clear understanding of the definition of the charge of fraud, It is an indictable offence punishable by a jail term. Some years ago, I  successfully defended a young person against such a charge in the Newmarket court house.

The definition of the charge is a deliberate plan by person or persons to deprive someone else of that which is rightfully theirs.

My point in the debate Mr.Mayor was directed to the question on the floor. Council's decision to adopt the Water Rates Bylaw.

No offence was taken by any member of Council from my use of the term. Therefore no Councillor believed I was accusing Council of perpetrating a fraud.

For two years  Mr. Mayor, I have challenged what I consider to be exorbitant increases in the town's water rates.

For five years ,I have consistently opposed the town's budget.

For the reason Mr. Mayor,that I cannot assure the people who gave me authority to occupy this seat, their financial interests are being represented.

I make no bones about my contention.

I believe the methodology used by the administration for water rate increases is seriously flawed.

I believe it is my responsibility to say so, frankly and clearly.

I do not acknowledge any person's right to challenge my authority to speak freely in a council debate.

Interrupt me while speaking.

Criticize my perspective on matters before Council.

Imply ulterior motive for a particular perspective

Rules of Order governing a Council debate  are clear. Mr. Mayor.

I am deeply disappointed that staff were permitted to disrupt a debate with an accusation against a Council Member . A charge that proved to be false was made by Mr. Elliott and supported by Mr. Garbe.

It was an onerous gesture of disrespect toward Council.

An apology will not suffice. No less than a full and public written withdrawal of the accusation is acceptable.

End of statement.

The Mayor chose  not to defend  the authority and supremacy of council. Not a wise decision.