Appointed from Council membership. The City of Toronto Act calls for it. But not for other municipalities in Ontario. I don't think it's necessary ..
The problem we have are tampered standards. People have gotten used to the idea, rules can be interpreted to suit the occasion.
Councillor Gaertner is convinced asking endless questions of staff is legitimate debate.
A change in the rules limits time for debate but allows that to continue.
I think that's crazy. Debate is taking a position for or against the question.When all sides have been heard, the question is put and a vote taken.
A Councilor either contributes to debate or not. They should be prepared to speak, listen and think on their feet. If they are not, they should not.
It wasn't happening during the last four years. Former Councillor Mac Eachern would be recognised by the chair without even turning and would monopolise the next twenty minutes with an endless run of questions. Following which, she was ready to vote
.
Gaertner stubbornly sticks to what's familiar.Brings written questions to the table and charging everyone else with being know-nothings.
When I came back in 2003, Morris, Kean and Vrancic were at the top of the table. They hogged the best committees. I expressed my dis-satisfaction. I had been used to Mayor and Clerk working on committee memberships subject to preferences and tabling a report for approval.
"Well" I said. "makes no never mind. Councillors are entitled by law to participate in town business
wherever it's happening.
Council Kean indicated no. That was not so..
I checked the bylaw and discovered changed wording. A Councillor could attend meetings and participate ... IF.... recognized by the Chair.
I moved to amend. Councillors have authority to participate, They may not vote if not a member. Recognition to speak from the chair is a given.
A Councillor cannot be excluded from discussion on a whim of the chair.
Councillor Vrancic saw no need to amend. He did not foresee a Councillor being excluded from discussion.
In fact it had happened.
Former Councillor Betty Pedersen attended a Leisure Services Advisory Committee. Took a seat at the table and was directed by the chair to leave the table and sit with non-members.
Councillor Vrancic was the chair .
The vote changed to favour the amendment.
Kean, Morris and Gaertner opposed. A Councillor was absent. Missed the discussion. Was there for Council's decision. Voted against it . The amendment was defeated.
At the first meeting of the 2006 term, the first time I spoke, I had not said six words when Councillor Mac Echearn interrupted with a point of order. Upheld by the chair.
I apologised and committed to doing better and continued in humble mien.
The second time I spoke, Councillor Wilson called a point of order before I'd gotten five words out.
A pattern formed. When I spoke, Councillor Wilson would slide down in his chair, let his eyes roll up in his head and his tongue loll out of the side of his mouth.
People watching at home at home were both astounded and horrified. .
I endured that conduct for eight months. I started the blog in August 2007 when it was clear nothing was going to change. Y'know...if a fight is what you want, a fight is what you'll get.
Enmity was real and palpable. It was not about positive change. It was about seek and destroy.
Four years of distortion and manipulation took their toll on the practice of rules. The new Council has followed on what was.
But they are intent on doing better. It will take more work and good will and working toward the same objective to get the town's business done in a timely and efficient manner.
Agendas need to be manageable and assembled with more consideration and respect for what can be accomplished in a single sitting.
Rules need to be brief, succinct , easily memorised and no longer subject to interpretation.
We just need a little more time and knowing we can trust each other.
A Council swims together or it sinks.
I don't believe anyone fancies that.
.
I must be getting stupid with age. I need
ReplyDeleteChristopher to explain how the Jazz Festival can take
all that grant money & volunteer work for 3 days & come up with a measly $3000 each for their chosen
charities. It does not make fiscal sense. Or I'm stupid, which it the more likely option.