Saying NO Is Not Without Consequence

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Skullduggery Afoot.":

During elections we see candidates listing their achievements. Most include some volunteer services. In a Town our size, there are bonds formed between like-minded individuals.

Why is it a surprise that you see members of council and former members of council that had like-minded activities before that still have them now? Holy crap, in some cases they are friends.

"Councillor Ballard was not delegated to represent the Town in official capacity." How do you know this? Maybe Dawe told him to handle it. I thik that you are so bitter that this thing even happens that you cannot see straight.

************************
There are a couple of points worth responding to in the above. 
First is the reference to new candidates listing  previous volunteer activities in the town  to indicate community involvement.
That is  natural and normal. 
Problems arise when tax resources  are perceived as a ready source of gravy to distribute between  various charitable organisations.
No distinction is made between a property owner's authority to make his/her own decision about charitable giving, and a Councoillor's authority   to put a hand in someone's pocket, without as much as a by-your-leave, and filch money to contribute to a cause of the Councillor's choosing. 
Waiving user fees for charitable causes  is a classic contradiction in terms. 
Most organisations  using town facilities are volunteer dependent. Few  sports programs would exist without parents  contributing hours to manage and  coach teams and raise funds to keep fees reasonable.
They don't have an option. 
Yet their cause is righteous. ..
They are required to pay user fees to reduce dependence on taxes to maintain the facilities needed for the  programs 
Then along come the Cure for Cancer fund raisers requesting fee waivers so they can  contribute a hundred instead of ninety-nine thousand to the cause.There's an ego factor here.
Or Jazz Festival organizers so they can pay  musicians a hundred  instead of ninety-eight thousand and  make the enterprise look like something it is not.
Objections  to either on  the  principle it is not the function of tax collectors to  contribute to  charitable causes  or provide employment for musicians, is obviously  because one is not in favour of finding a cure for cancer or providing  employment for musicians.
Oh Dear Me YES !!! The person saying NO is always the dastardly villain.
In the next election, we will discover again what people really think about that. 
On the second point; I do know Councillor Ballard was not delegated to represent the Mayor because Council has already taken care of that chore. 
At the first meeting of the term, Council  appoints an Acting Mayor for any time the Mayor is not available.
This term  Councillor John Abel, as in other terms the Councillor who gained the  highest number of votes,. was appointed. .
He was at the Jazz bash.He paid his $5.  He was not part of the entourage . He was not invited. 
It's  that simple. 
Neither the Mayor nor his representative were  invited to represent the Town at the event. 
The Town was slighted. Deliberately
Despite putting the Jazz bash private interest ahead  of the Municipal Corporation business.
Hopefully, a lesson  may have been  learned. .