The Relevant Question?

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "I Just Realised":

It seems like you're picking on the current people involved with the Cultural Centre for something that they weren't responsible for many years ago. I don't think that is fair, Councillor Buck.
It is clear that you have a vengeance against all things Morris (I'm no fan of hers) but I don't give them any credit for what the people are doing there now. I go to lots of events there and I'm hardly a "culture vulture".
I am on a very fixed income but like doing things in my own town with my family that are entertaining, informative and reasonably priced for all members of my family. It is certainly not snooty as it seems some suggest on this site. Perhaps they haven't been to the place.
I understand from this site that you have never been to the place. As my elected official, (yes, I did vote for you) I am very surprised that you rely on other people to tell you things without seeing it for yourself first hand.
It doesn't help you if they are giving you misinformation.
***************
Comments are simply pouring in to the blog. Moderating them means to me that I click on publish or delete.

Many are so cryptic,I can make neither head nor tails of them If they get published it's a mistake.

Some cite names of people who have not put themselves forward in a public way.I will not print them for reasons of privacy. Theirs.

Others are sarcastic towards me. I think people who want to denigrate my ideas can do that in their own space. I feel no obligation to let them do it in mine.

If a comment is rational though opposite to my own, it is published because that's what provides the stimulus for discussion.

The comment above, I suspect. For several reasons. If a person who voted for me because they trust me, which is all I ask,then they should be willing to contact me personally and give their name.

That should be their expectation.It's mine. Privacy will be respected.People who know me,know that about me.

The word "elite" has appeared in comments. If some people feel and express that in an argument,it deserves to be known. We should know what people are thinking.

This morning,numbers of visits to blog are at 232, Views are 599. time spent reading is as long as eighteen minutes and averaging at 7.5 minutes

Views average at 2.5 minutes. That's long enough to read the posts.

I posted the number when it reached 200 for the first time. Predictably there was a sneer and a jeer in response.I probably didn't publish that.

The comment above astounds me. I had been active in Aurora politics for thirty years before the former Mayor appeared on the scene. Antagonism towards was not what drove me all those years.

But she and her three followers were what made me run again in 2003. Politically, Aurora has a tradition for vigorous politics. plenty of blows were struck.There was never a shortage of political knavery. But there ws always a level of decency beneath which politicians did not descend.

Perhaps not so much because of high-mindedness among politicians. But because the community would not tolerate it and the politicians understood how low they could go.

When I watched how Phyllis Morris and her three supporters conducted themselves on Council,I had the normal community reaction. I saw no level to which they would not sink.

I saw a driving force of hatred,rage and envy entirely out of place in Canadian politics.

I took the only course I knew.

I put my name on the ballot. My reputation carried me forward.

It's never too late to make the effort to correct something that is terribly wrong.

What this council is about, right now, is mopping up. It won't happen overnight.It may not be completed in a single term.Substantial damage was wrought over four years. Far more serious than appeared.

As long as the community does not lose its focus it will happen. Our town's politics will be no more clen and tidy than anyone else's. But it will have that level to which we will not stoop.

This morning I have one question of my correspondent above;

if you so enjoy the program at the Culture Centre,
why do you think you would enjoy it less if the museum was in its rightful home?

Why do you think it was fair to freeze the museum and the Historial Society out of the building they invested years,thousands of hours of hard and dirty volunteer labour, so much of their financial resources; a considerable part being a bequest from a woman so dedicated as to leave a substantial sum in her estate for the work to carry on.

Why do you think, under all these circumstances, it was just to lock them out from a beautiful facility renovated for their purpose that they helped to build; provided in trust to a board to operate,with no rent to pay, no maintenance overhead and a handout of more than a third of a million tax dollars a year; why do you think the right decision was made when they decided to hog the facility for a different purpose?

That's the relevant question.





If it means frequent reference to what was that's what will have to mean.