"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 25 April 2013

Fallacy leading to an Extravagant Farce.

A week or so ago I wrote a post about an interview with Democratic Senator Carl Levine of Michigan. The Senator has been in office thirty-four years and will serve two more.He has been elected 9 times.

He is working with  Republican Senator John McCain to eliminate some of the entitlements for tax relief  for business in the U.S. Total  share of tax revenue from business is nine per cent. It was  fifty per cent not long ago.  Senator Levin hopes to  complete the task before he retires. He explained  to his  interviewer Charlie Rose, it is  a very difficult and complicated task.

Charlie asked him what he needs to be successful.

He said wistfully I thought, he would like more elected representatives to have the courage to risk losing votes or even risk losing an election  by  doing what's right for the country.

It seems obvious lobbyists in the States have the country in a death grip.

What excuse do we have  in  this little town that prevents a Council, elected  with such high hopes from acting in the best interest of the community -at - large  as opposed to the special interests of a few, time and time and time again.

I have asked  the  town solicitor if  he would post  last night's advice to Council  on the town's web site.

If I get  approval from Council he will.  Of course that calls for a  notice of motion to be on the agenda of the next Council meeting, to be a motion two weeks later. It may or may not win approval from Council.

They may not want you to know all the information provided that made the idea of  filing an injunction an act of complete irresponsibility and total wasteful extravagance.

Comments are coming in to the blog fast and furious. It's clear there is no  synpathy for the Marsh Harbour  residents' position.  Nor support for the direction Council is taking.

The story will come out in The Auroran on Tuesday. Too late for people  to have an opportunity for input.

The web site will likely have an  item on  Wednesday's action. The  story is not complete without the Solicitor's report.

I believe it should be on the web site without  the need for direction  from Council.

People who want to know the facts should call the administration and say so.

Wednesday's meeting was held with twenty four hours notice.

A decison representing  spending more than a hundred and fifty thousand dollars  was made with less than the forty-eight  hours  required for an emergency meeting. A motion to waive procedure  was passed to allow it. 

It's  about  the  deliberate distortion that formal action was  taken without  people in a particular neighborhood  being notified in time for input.

How's that for a contradiction in terms.


Anonymous said...

Unfortunately I think Council has to vote to put something on the web-site. Or to take it down. I recall a council meeting with plenty of angry people demanding that the item on Evelyn be taken down. It did not happen. Instead Councillor Wilson did his paper-waving thing, declaring he had so much to do & demanded that " We move on, Council has Work to do "

Anonymous said...

Due to councillor Ballard's slurs, staff feel they are under attack. That is probably accurate as he has targeted at least 3 of them. Downey, Mar & the planning guy who all seem very competent. We have seen this before - throw the hirelings overboard. I don't think it will work again but the same people are playing the cards.

Anonymous said...

Ain't got no spine. We knew that but took what was offered because there was no option.

Anonymous said...

If an emergency council meeting can be held with 24 hours notice, as opposed to the "normal" emergency 48 hours notice, why is it not possible for the council to authorize the posting on the town's website of the report from the Town Solicitor that was requested at the regular council meeting April 23 and which, presumably, formed the basis for the discussion at last night's meeting?

Surely bureaucratic rules can be relaxed without bringing the world to an end. Council seems to be hiding behind procedure, instead of demonstrating a serious commitment to the public to provide, instantaneously if necessary in this age of technology, the very information that might have served as the basis for council's consideration of the issues on April 24.

And we are not talking about chicken feed, rather about a potential legal undertaking that requires very specific expertise at a cost that could approach or even exceed $150,000. It seems ludicrous that councillors fall back on procedure, instead of fulfilling their sworn responsibility to those who elected them in an efficient and transparent manner.

This entire exercise has been filled with stupidity and hypocrisy from the very beginning, and its name is Ballard.

Anonymous said...

Hey, I am computer-challenged but I know about e-mails. We pay for the Aurora communications department & keep hearing about how much it needs in up=grading. We have paid, and paid, and paid........post that damn stuff.

Anonymous said...

"Comments are coming in to the blog fast and furious. It's clear there is no synpathy (sic) for the Marsh Harbour residents' position. Nor support for the direction Council is taking."

I hope you're not saying that the sentiments expressed by your commenters reflect in any way the feeling of the "community-at-large." Such a small sample size prevents any extrapolation, and should deny blanket statements.

Anonymous said...

10:19 PM
D you mean like C. Ballard's blanket ' Whereas ' statements at the regular Council meeting? A whole lot of speculation and mud-slinging dressed in pseudo-legalese ?