The comment below came in yesterday. Theresa heard me . "What are you laughing at" she asked.
So I read it to her right to the end.
I know I have solid support. Many have been loyal since my first time candidacy.But it's nice to see a positive rating.
"Of course" I said "I can't publish it. Readers may think I wrote it myself".
But I didn't reject it. I 'll sleep on it ,I thought.
And I changed my mind. Why should I not accept a positive rating? I'm a politician for goodness sake. We thrive on encouragement. Written expressions of support are rare and should be taken as we find them
Thank you, anonymous.
I do not keep score cards. We are each accountable to the people who elected us. None of us are responsible for the performance of others. I am happy to share my substantial experience but if it is not considered useful, I can live with that as well.
I agree with your observations about conduct of meetings . Fortunately there is time for improvement all around. Councillors were chosen despite a lack of experience. They need time to learn.
They appear not to grasp the necessary tension between administration and the political body. Choosing instead, almost one hundred per cent, to align themselves with the administration.
The electorate have a different perspective. Closer to my own I think.
The administration is not accountable to the electorate.
Councillor members are.They need think independently instead of leaning entirely on information from staff ; which can only be intended to support staff recommendations.
It is for councillors to decide what voters will or will not accept.
Comments like the one below remind them.
It's why I decided to post it. Though it has a sting . For which I may be held accountable.
**************************************
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "You Were Saying":
Talking of funnelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to non-elected bodies that bear no responsibility for accounting for how it is spent, have you ever mentally prepared a report card on the mayor and your fellow councillors?
Ability to think (under fire/otherwise) Ability to speak coherently Overall performance Political Future
____________________________________ __________________________ ___________________ ______________
Geoff Dawe 6 6 1/2 6 unclear
John Abel 6 6 6 unclear
Michael Thompson 5 1/2 5 1/2 5 1/2 unclear
Paul Pirri 6 6 6 unknown
Sandra Humfryes 4 1/4 4 3/4 4 1/2 questionable
John Gallo 4 3 3/4 4 none
Wendy Gaertner 0 0 0 * retire
Chris Ballard 4 3/4 5 4 7/8 very questionable
Evelyn Buck 8 1/2 9 9 1/2 ** unlimited
* This grading system does not permit negative numbers ** Bonus point
On the whole, the result is probably on a par with many other municipal councils. But there is a great deal of improvement that must be made if Aurora residents are to get the service to which they are entitled in exchange for their tax dollars.
There is far too much time wasted at both Council and GC meetings on matters such as repeater delegations, awards (should be separate), motions and questions and points on purely procedural factors.
Meetings must be managed better and agendas should be completed for each session.
Thinking and speaking clearly MUST be improved if our town is going to have the future it deserves.
Please try and get this layout right.
Friday, 2 September 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
It would have been interesting to see what your commentator might have done with the members of the previous term of Council.
You probably would still have ranked at the top, closely followed by Alison with Bob trooping along somewhat behind her.
It might have been necessary to have the grading system modified to permit negative scores as the remaining councillors would have all fallen into that category.
Lying at the very bottom of the inverted pyramid would have been her dishonour, draped in legal documents and waving the same rusty dagger that she used with such great regularity to skewer "any and all" - is that familiar? - who dared stand in her way or state a contrary opinion.
My thoughts on the current crew is quite varied. I have been very disappointed with the mayor in terms of leadership and meeting management skills. However I am willing to be somewhat patient with the new members who have a lot to learn - except for the arrogant one who feels he has nothing to learn and smirks.
Of the two of three from the previous term, one is just plain counter-productive and dumb, quite frankly. The other is as much a waste of space as he was for his last half-term.
Thank you councillor Buck for without you there would be next to no background knowledge or astute questions.
Not sure how you can grade Gallo. He hasn't been
o tis Council since he gave his impressive thank-you's
after he was elected. for the most part, he pats his
facial fuzz and make no contribution.
Should we judge Mayor Dawe by the Tuesday night telecasts of Council meetings, or judge him by different atmosphere around Town Hall and it's staff.
Maybe we should be judging him and the rest of Council by the amazing decrease in contentious issues that no longer fill the blogs and local media.
Post a Comment