Tuesday's 3pm meeting will be streamed.Apparently it's a simple matter of clicking a button.
I am still conflicted about the meeting.
I've read the candidates profiles.. Once.
I plan to attend out of respect for the candidates but for the same reason the process is even more
unacceptable. Amendments to the process do not make it better.
Appointments are regularly made by Council within a term of office.
Councils are elected every four years.
The Municipal Clerk is the Elections Officer . He makes the rules. Council has no authority in the
matter.
Candidates cannot make rules whereby they are to be elected. Obviously.
The Municipal Act requires Council to APPOINT a person to fill the vacant seat.
I contend the Municipal Clerk/ Elections Officer has no role in recommending a process in the matter of appointment.
Ample precedents are established.
The recommended process is unworkable under the Town's procedure bylaw.
For a question to be considered by Council a Mover and seconder are required.
Debate is normal though not essential. Prior to discussion, a motion to put the question without debate is in order .
A majority can adopt a motion to proceed without debate.
In the process recommended by the Clek/ Elections Officer, who has no authority in the matter because it's an appointment, not an election; no provision is made for motions to be duly moved and seconded ; no provision to debate the motions; and no provision for motions to be decided by separate votes.
Invitation extended to apply to fill the vacant seat was not inappropriate.
Once invited , requirement to submit a profile cannot be faulted.
Opportunity to make public presentations becomes problematic ....because...for eight Councillors , after listening to eighteen presentations, to debate in public why the choice if this candidate would be more suitable another is both inappropriate and unacceptable.
The problem is not resolved by marking a ballot.
For Councilloars, to vote for this person versus all others without giving a reason is not acceptable.
Certainly transparency is not the result.
I will not vote in support of the recommendation amended by staff.
Out of respect for the candidates I will attend.
Out of the same respect, I will not cast a vote without justification.
I will not publicly discuss the merits of one candidate over another
Given the opportunity ,I will do what I can to persuade Council the normal process for appointment be observed.
Privacy and dignity of the individual takes precedence over. a pretext of openness and transparency.
Monday, 28 July 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Thanks for the info about the streaming, Councillor. Much appreciated.
I think you are doing the right thing by attending out of respect for the candidates. I assume they are putting a lot of effort into their presentations and so should be given a fair hearing.
The person chosen could get a boost if they have (or will) put their name forward for the October election.
If I may quote or at least paraphrase the Mayor of Mississauga on the issue of spending she said, .. I treat the taxpayers' money like my own and that is sparingly.
Look for this quality in the candidates and if one stands out give him or her the nod. If they talk of big schemes on the taxpayers' dime respectfully point them to the exit as soon as possible.
14:40
- & no visions, please
I checked the town web-site earlier. There was nothing about the streaming.
It will greatly reduce the time required if councillors can refrain from a preamble about how they appreciate the good work being done by that individual on such and such a committee. Just a suggestion.
19:12- I agree. But Humphrey’s I’m sure will go on and on and on.
@22:53
I was thinking of her and of Cllr Abel.
Both Councillors held back on the gush. Maybe they do read the Blog ?
Post a Comment