"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Saturday, 5 December 2015


One of my favorite movies is "Ghost" .  During the last two terms of Council, there were umpteen times when I experienced exactly the  same frustration of Patrick Swayze, the ghost, before he found the Whoopi Goldberg character. 

The situation would be desperate.... as a ghost, he watched it coming ...but the woman he loved and wanted to protect could not hear his voice. He was a ghost.

I knew all too well how badly they were being steered but because it was incomprehensible to Councillors that people with such authority could  be so ill-equipped. my voice was simply not heard. c

Incredibly, though they could not be unaware of the determination for change that really had nothing to do with them, they had not understood. 

They hadn't seen previous staff replaced, how it was accomplished and the purpose of it. 

They failed to appreciate  the thoughtful community gives new Councillors time to learn. Voters take personal satisfaction from watching it happen with people they chose to elect.    

Will we ever forget the night of the Abel/Pirri motion to give  a year's notice of termination to the Culture Centre Board as required by the agreement?

 The Mayor never  spoke so eloquently on any issue before or since. Yet....when the debate had exhausted itself ...the only thing left was to vote...there was a pause....the vote was not called  ...  a motion obviously intended to be moved by Councillor Humfryes was moved instead by Councillor Thompson, seconded by Humfryes to do exactly the opposite of how the debate had proceeded. 

So much more was lost that night.... early  in the 2010/14 council. 


Anonymous said...

Where they (ciuncil) badly steered Evelyn? I have my doubts. I believe they were trying to steer us, the residents Justifying their spending, all in the name of transparency and quality of life. Some of the acting was so poorly performed, others were oscar performances.

Anonymous said...

Those surprised by the events of that deliberation were only hearing what they wanted/hoped to hear. As with most council debate, both sides of the issue were verbalized - and, thankfully, a potential tragedy was averted.

Anonymous said...

"Yet...when the debate had exhausted itself...the only thing left was to vote...there was a pause...the vote was not called...a motion obviously intended to be moved by Clr "H" was moved instead by Clr. "T", seconded by "H" to do exactly the opposite of how the debate had proceeded."

These councillors should not be let out after 5:00 pm and then only in the company of a parent or minder.

They are a disgrace to the position to which they have been elected and there doesn't appear to be a damn thing we can do about it until next voting day. Immediate and permanent recall must be made mandatory.

Anonymous said...

Cllr Abel has never been the same. Three of those who has run on an undeclared slate with him let him have it in the
back with absolutely no warning to either him or Cllr Pirri. Actually I think Pirri was damaged that night too.

Anonymous said...

It was a couple of rookie councillors being manipulated for someone else's personal agenda and it rightfully failed. All's well that ends well.

Anonymous said...

" a potential tragedy " ?
No, council allowed itself to be determined as one that could be manipulated by the loudest voices
regardless of their residential qualifications . And so it has been ever since with only a very few exceptions.
Evelyn is right on the mark....anyone could have taken that election. Unfortunately we had few to
chose from so they do get that credit. But only that one.

Anonymous said...

"No, council allowed itself to be determined as one that could be manipulated by the loudest voices..."

You mean like they were by the opponents of the South-East Heritage Conservation Area?

Anonymous said...

You did lose that one, didn't you ? A rare exception to the Scream for Votes rule.

Anonymous said...

The town lost that one, 16:53. You only need to see the proliferation of knock-downs in the historic core for 'faux chateaus' and 'McMansions.'

Anonymous said...

I have no problem at all with new residents who take pride in their homes even if the current crop are so
much larger than houses used to be. It was obvious that some of those original homes were not structurally
sound anymore and would cost stupid amounts of money without increasing space or value. Watching the
progress of that old Doane place was painful.