I am still resolved not to read Councillor Ballard's blog though I am glad to hear of his readers' reactions.
A feature of the Mormac administration were the people they gathered around them to make themselves invincible.
Whitehurst , Walmer and Ballard were all appointed to what should have been Council positions.
They most certainly did have an influence. But obviously not what they anticipated.
Gallo was another of the Mayor's little pets.I heard of him being led by the hand at the HoeDown on one occasion.
Gaertner was useful because of her unqualified admiration and unquestioning obedience to whatever was demanded of her.
More so from MacEachern than Morris.She is still carrying out her good and faithful servant role.
Granger,I think, became something of a liability. Wilson, they could never depend upon. He found it difficult at times to subjugate his judgement to theirs.
Ballard appeared comparatively late on the scene. His value likely were his skills as a journalist. He has indicated he worked as a reporter in Aurora and covered Council at one point in time.
If he was there when I was, he left no lasting impression.
His recollection on Tuesday, at Council , of how Aurora Agricultural Society organised the Class A Aurora Horse Show in the town park was certainly skewed.
Not surprising really, since he was probably not much more than four, when last the Horse Show was held in Mosely Park.
Obviously,my blog was recognised as a threat to their well-being soon after it began. They spent $70.thousand tax dollars to a lawyer to bring it to an end.
Yet the opportunity to blog was theirs at any time
None of them did.
The Mayor had opportunity to write a regular column in The Auroran. She didn't do that either. Although she claims to have been a writer in an award winning newspaper.
Former Councillor MacEachern was no slouch when it came to acidulous commentary, written mostly at the witching hour, but she also failed to take up the opportunity to enter the new fray through written political commentary.
That must have been why Christopher Ballard came to their attention as a potential resource.
Putting thoughts into writing on a regular basis reveals a great deal
about a writer.
This too is true...writing isn't worth the time it takes,if nobody wants to read what you have to say.
I do not have thousands of daily readers. I do have people who regularly log in , who share my obsession with town affairs and even enjoy participating in the exchange.
I know this blog is a contribution to the town's affairs.
It's enough.
Nothing I hear of Councillor Ballard's blog encourages me to believe it deserves attention.
The latest cited reference to "the rubes" who live in our town and are elected to public office, particularly to the office of Mayor , does not permit me to believe he has a snowball's chance in hell of earning a responsible readership.
Nothing persuades me to add to his numbers .
A quote from the large hyphenated woman in yorkregion.com: "Arts and culture is one of the new economic drivers for the 21st century."
ReplyDeleteShe must be living on another planet. Is the CBC (Canada's pre-eminent cultural entity) thriving following a 10% budget cut and the layoff of many hundreds of employees? Ask any of these people about economic driver and they will probably drive one right into her significant centre.
Why is the National Ballet cold-calling for donations after a five year hiatus? Is it because of their sizeable surplus? More likely their deficit.
Don't get me wrong, art and culture, along with cooking and breast-feeding are all important, but none of them are artificial drivers for this century or any.
Why do these people have to always inflate every idea they have until it becomes a subject of ridicule?
By the way, a word of advice for Johnny Gallo - stick to the pas de deux and avoid the Hoedown.
I did notice that Councillor Ballard had no comments on his acid-laden article. Since I'm used to finding comments all over Evelyn's Blog, ranging from good, bad to indifferent, that struck me as odd. I didn't know if they were hidden from me or if there were none. The item had been there for some time. On Evelyn's Blog, someone would have at least made a snarky remark. Maybe there isn't a lot of traffic as that was my 2nd visit in 3-4 months. Must hurt to write such pithy stuff and not even be ignored.
ReplyDeleteBallard may have convinced himself that he has a gift with words. Well, he has just made an enormous gaffe with one. Aurorans will not soon forget that he has referred to then and their Council as ' rubes ' in the Banner. That is going to come back and bite him when someone asks him about it on the campaign trail. There will not be adequate time to clean it up by trying to limit the comment's range. It is sitting out there waiting.He simply cannot compare his education and experience with those of an entire town of taxpayers and find them to be the ones lacking. Sometimes one's strengths lead to one's downfall through sheer arrogance.
ReplyDeleteIt's the need to see his name in print. Can't resist and there is also a strong desire to have the last word. You have to pity him as he is so frequently in the minority and categorically dismissed along with Gaertner and Gallo when he considers himself a cut above.
ReplyDeleteJust watched ACM. You sizzled earlier at council and she was better than ever. Interesting to see your numbers. Difficult to keep banging your heads at stupidity. but that was a good week for both of you.
ReplyDeleteAs a rule I never read Mr. Ballard's blog but was prompted to by recent posts here.
ReplyDeleteThe man is certainly entitled to his opinions but frankly I found the post disturbing in many respects.
The post exudes an almost total devotion to all things ACC with the Town clearly representing the “bad guy”.
Some “snapshots”
Annual financial reporting isn’t necessary – every three years is fine.
Independent audits prove the success of the ACC – while Town staff reports are inaccurate.
The ACC has not been permitted to defend itself “It is unfairly forced to suffer in silence”
Having councilors sit on the ACC board “promotes political interference in the arts”
The ACC is referred to as a charity – which it is not
“Certain members of council, including the mayor, have been insistent that the Centre accept a council member on its Board and to come before council each year to beg for its budget allotment”
Disingenuous or dilusional?
Who can tell?
Councilor Ballard was elected to council by the voters yet he gives the impression he was appointed as the ACC’s representative on council.
The ACC is not a town department – it is an independent business that seeks financing from the Town..
Perhaps it is a not-for-profit company but it is not a registered charity.
The ACC is not a benevolent provider of “culture” – it sells such activities for a fee.
For our $500K investment we should be getting a decent return.
In my opinion the Mar Report was reasonably clear in the minimum requirements that should be included in any financial agreement with the ACC to protect the taxpayers investment.
The bigger question for council will be if the taxpayers would be better served by having this money invested elsewhere or the Church St. School put to a different use.
"...it is an independent business that seeks financing from the Town.. Perhaps it is a not-for-profit company but it is not a registered charity."
ReplyDeleteTim, Tim, Tim ... in a word: Wrong!
The Cultural Centre is an incorporated non-profit with the ability to issue charitable donation tax receipts (from their website: "the Centre, a Registered Non-profit Charity").
You're Welcome, Tim.