For a start it's out of order. A Resolution approved by Council, confirmed by Bylaw ,cannot be re-considered within six months except by waiver of procedure requiring two-thirds vote of Council.
It's an attempt to correct an oversight which would not have occurred without the convoluted process set in motion without input from Council.
It's tied up in the knots we created for ourselves.
Who experiences the election process? Councillors that's who.
Who has most experience? Moi.
The amendments recognize timing for questions is open-ended.
Change suggests questions and answers be "concise"
Responsibility for determining what is or is not "concise" rests with the presiding member.
In this instance, Master of Ceremony, Chief Magistrate, Head Honcho, probably helpful architect and consultant for the entire nonsensical process, His Honour, The Mayor.
All Candidates Meetings for town elections ,traditionally organized by Aurora Library Board
provides for a Master of Ceremony , a Person of Status, known to be completely detached from the town's political affairs.
Purpose is to avoid all possibility or suggestion of bias or prejudice.
The process must be fastidious.
Between now and Tuesday afternoon Councillors have the additional task of comparing two questions for each of sixteen candidates.Two will apparently not attend.
I have an idea.
It's wicked. Promise you won't tell.
I contemplate asking candidates who they plan to support as the next Mayor.
Current choice is between two .
Whatever decision the presiding member makes, it can
under no circumstances be seen to be impartial or unbiased.
Yet the question is concise. The answer equally concise and within the rules set out.
Candidates can properly cite the right to a secret ballot.
If the decision is to disallow the question, the response to both must be the same.
But what is opposed is precisely what is being required of Councillors.
A second staff change recommended in the process requires ballots bearing the Councillor's
and candidates name to be distributed.
Votes will be cast.....ballots collected.....votes tallied and who voted for who will be publicly proclaimed.
The record will forever show which seventeen candidates were publicly rejected by which Councillors.
It is different to not being elected in a municipal election.
By attaching names of voters the selection becomes personal.
Having read the submissions, I have no stomach to do that to any of the eighteen who accepted an invitation to serve the community.
Posts
7 comments:
It's not called a "secret ballot" for nothing.
I do not believe any questions can be disallowed by anyone. Unfortunately that means that some questions could be tactless. We just have to hope that the presence of the camera will restrict anything ugly. Basically a mess has been created and it has to be cleared away.
Tickets could be sold to this event. I believe the performances will be outstanding.
How about:
" Did you vote in the last municipal election ? "
Roger has its regular programs on Tuesday afternoon. They might tape that meeting but unless Council manages to get it streamed, people are unlikely to watch or even bother to find out when it is broadcast. It is the middle of summer- my neighbours are mostly off doing family events.
What about those with out Rogers cable access? Some people do not like being screwed.
7:56
Cannot help you there. The track record of managing to stream or get meetings to the public has not improved this term. It is not any worse than before but not better either.
It is quite perplexing as there are always comments around the table about holding information sessions to inform residents. I would like to see the meetings for myself rather than be told at a later event what is going to happen.
Post a Comment