"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 24 October 2013

A Council Divided is A Contradiction In Terms

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "What does it profit man if he gains he whole worl...":

Is it an embarrassment when none of your motions pass? Is it even more embarrassing when the only support comes from Morris's minions?


I would be profoundly  ashamed and embarrassed if I did not  use the opportunity to bring to the table issues I believe need to be addressed. 

If no other  Councillor shares my concerns, I  must accept that as part of the democratic process. 

The community knows the issue haas been brought forward and addressed or not as the case may be. 

Every vote on Council has equal weight. 

My own of course  means most to me .

I am not inclined to disdain  support wherever the vote in favor comes from. of an idea

If  the  motion passes, I express my appreciation.

If it fails I offer no complaint.

I did what people expect of me.

If this Council is seen to be divided into camps, each camp is equally responsible.

Only rank amateurs  trap themselves into block voting.

A house divided cannot stand.


Anonymous said...

A couple of things really struck me as ironic during this week's Council meeting.

First, Cllr Gaertner pressing the issue of residency during the FabLab discussion. This, from someone whose own status as a resident of Aurora was called into question at some point this term.

Also, Cllr Buck's numerous, impassioned invocations of a desire for Council to be a "cohesive unit." That struck me as highly incongruous and puzzling considering her decades-long reputation as an iconoclast and contrarian.

Anonymous said...

14:56 1.

Cllr Gaertner also suggested that staff occupy the Petch House.

The comments re ' cohesive unit ' were in relation to a motion on the floor.

Huh? said...

15:28, neither of your points negate my observations.

Anonymous said...

Section 225 of the Municipal Act clearly sets forth the role of the head of council and in sub-section (c) states "to provide the council with leadership."

Leadership is a fluid thing and I would bring to mind two fairly recent examples concerning U.S. presidents. Compare President George W. Bush during and following hurricane Katrina with President Barack Obama during and following hurricane Sandy. It is truly mind boggling that holders of this office could have acted more differently with respect to leadership. Bush didn't demonstrate any and Obama was seen side by side with Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie just days before a national election, leading, and receiving the highest accolades from the governor.

In Canada you should look at the recently re-elected mayor of Calgary leading his city and its people through the severe trauma of catastrophic flooding and going back a few years the mayor of Vancouver leading his city to the highest acclaim arising from an extremely successful Olympic Games, even at a cost of several billions of dollars over budget.

We have witnessed during the past few weeks some of the stupidest discussion around the council table concerning three trees, notwithstanding a staff report approving their removal. The number of hours wasted is appalling. Leadership would have demonstrated itself by supporting the staff report and having done with the matter there and then.

Leadership comes from experience of working with and guiding people in a common direction. Unanimity will seldom occur, but so what? It is the will of the majority that will prevail. This will must be led, not pushed.

Christopher Watts said...

"A house divided cannot stand."

Actually the abomination that is Petch House 2.0 proves this statement to be false.

The Petch House couldn't be more divided, yet it stands. Unwittingly ts location and reconstruction was approved before arriving at a purpose. The result is an inside out house, with no plumbing or electrical located in a restrictive location at a cost more than double of what was received by the developer.

I think it is a testament to what this council can and has accomplished to date.
It is laughable to know the Town is not just entertaining the notion of a $10 Million heritage Disneyland but that they are spending $25,000 to do a feasibility study.

Is it feasible for Aurora to construct 3 more Petch Houses. You better believe it.

Anonymous said...

Geez…18:27…You had to remind us of that $25,000 on that study…I am sooo done with these crack pot shenanigans. What part of this “deal” on prime land for a heritage park justifies a study? I think the Town should invest in a full time medical doctor for council. A doctor that specializes in Psychiatry I’m sure will do wonders and will “improve the Towns quality of living”.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, I wonder what the four men and a dog that comprises the Aurora Heritage Authority actually do?

Anonymous said...

Actually there is no dog.The numbers are growing in intetest though.