"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

Thursday 1 November 2007

A Comedy (???) of Errors

People had such high hopes for this fresh new council. I still do. But it's taking so long. Too many indefensible decisions have been made, too many lives damaged while the power for change has yet to take voice. In reaction, my natural tendency to be brutally candid has become more frequent of late.

Someone told me once they admired my courage to say what I think, despite knowing I would be hated for it. If it was a compliment, I didn't deserve it. I don't believe a person should be hated for being straighforward. It doesn't take courage. All it takes is a powerful aversion to what passes for modern political discourse, a penchant for declaring the obvious and willingness to risk for the sake of honesty; like a player in a high stakes poker game.

After the recent provincial election, the usual lamentations were heard about voter indifference. Again we heard, there ought to be a law requiring people to vote.


What about a rule against simpering, insipid, nauseating, pandering, mind-deadening, scrupulously artificial twaddle spread around in layers thick enough to choke a hundred horses, to obscure the fact candidates are diverting attention from the things people are concerned about.

I have recently been frustrated in an effort to have council consider a review of signs in the North East Quadrant, locale of the infamous Traffic Calming Measures. My intention was to provide a measure of relief to neighbours who have been deprived of their right to use roads they have paid for. Three members supported re-consideration. Councillors Marsh, Collins-Mrakas and myself. Four, led by the Mayor, voted it down. Councillor McRoberts did not vote. Councillor MacEachern was absent.

My notice of motion experienced a relatively arduous process with repeated reference to requirements of the Procedural Bylaw. There seemed to be a peculiar determination to prevent the motion from appearing on the agenda or any other part of the public record, such as the Town's web site.

In an immediately previous meeting, other motions were verbally presented and voted upon, involving significant expenditures, without benefit either of notice or a motion in writing, of which both are requirements of the Procedural Bylaw. They were expedited by the presiding member, Mayor Morris, with no regard for the rules and without intervention from the Director of Corporate Services. It is his job it is to advise council against contravening the town's legislation. But nowadays in town, one risks one's job to do it properly.

One motion was to provide an additional $65,000 to satisfy the demands of a handful of residents on Knowles Crescent for the completion of their driveways. (The total has already escalated to $71,000.)

The second was to approve in principle $400,000 to the South Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority for a project they have in mind.

Both motions were made in immediate response to requests made by delegations to council. Even Sears could not beat that level of service. Buit we aim to please.

In this edition of The Auroran, is an advert displaying the motion so deliberately prevented from ever becoming public.

Municipalities are required by law to adopt a Procedure Bylaw for the purpose of consistency in orderly, open and transparent conduct of public business. Haphazard application is worse than no application. It bespeaks skullduggery.







Footnote :

Between Knowles and Holman Crescent there are a hundred homes. Tax revenue to the town from both streets , is approximately seventy thousand dollars. That's the amount of extra money provided over and above the million dollars spent to construct an upgraded road for fifty-one homes on Knowles Crescent.

Half of seventy-one thousand went into the hands of six residents to pay for driveway aesthetics far in excess of any neighbour on their street or mine.

At their request, Council sidelined Public Works and paid a consultant eleven thousand dollars to do their job. He sat down with residents and made a record of their requirements to present to council. It was received as information .


Anyone who wants to see how tax money was spent, should drive to Knowles Crescent and take a gander.

Do I take exception to mine and my neighbours' tax money being spent that way? Damn right, I do.

Had I voted for that, I would have been in breach of trust to the people who elected me. Malfeasance is the term used in the Oath of Office.

No comments: