"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 26 October 2017


By way of argument, little was offered to support Council's decision this week to reduce their number from eight to six.No tally of long hours spent trying to cope with the crushing burden of  work load.

Councillor Humfryes moved the motion and spoke of "powerful evidence of forward thinking " 
without interpretation of the gobbledegook. She hopes it leads to a ward system and  a 
stronger council in eight years, when she can be more accountable to her area. 

Councillor Humfryes has full- time employment elsewhere and a lengthy commute which makes it 
hard to get to meetings in time. 

Council Pirri said he favoured change but wanted to understand why others had changed their minds
since the last election. 

Mayor Dawe was absent, providing neither leadership nor a position on the issue.   

Councillor Abel was not quoted . Nor Councillor Mrakas .

Councillors Thom saw no reason for change....to be or not to be. 

Councillor Gaertner it seems was similarly afflicted. 

Nothing was said of potential improvement, better financial control or wiser decision-making with 
fewer bodies at the table. 

Councillor Thompson spoke of reading in the Harvard Business Review that above the number seven,
efficiency is reduced by 10% witheach addition.

It's  an interesting equation. Watching our elected body perform, how might one determine which 
two members consistently contributes 10% ,more or less,to efficiency ? Are they at the bottom,the 
top, evenly spread or randomly spot on? 

In any election, are runners -up the obvious deadwood among candidates? Or simply the winners of fewer votes. 

Was the momentous decision in 2013 ,to proceed with a $26 million JOC construction project made by the wisest contingent ? Or simply the majority? A vacancy had reduced council to 8 members but council chose to fill it for 3 months without business, for a single item to be executed. Look how efficient that turned out to be. 

In the new term, the Mayor and Councillor Abel were assigned financial oversight of  the project. A 
floor and the green roof  were among items left off to meet the budget.

Is a financial audit needed  to reveal what went wrong? Or may we consider the point in the
Harvard Business Review proven?  

Would $6 million dollars have been less likely spent on a redundant park in Mavrinac with two fewer 
Lords-a- leaping, pandering politicians on Council? 

Or would the principle of safety in numbers still prevail?

So many questions, so few answers ! 

$1 million are spent annually on "culture " while a competition swimming pool was closed for weeks with commensurate loss of revenue, for  half the liner to be cleaned because  not enough funds were provided  to clean the other half? 

Who does stuff like that? Or more to the point,who did?

Does the entire community really prefer candidates who seek to serve only the selfish minority? 

Or does the 10% less efficiency rule apply to every extra person who votes ?

I have received a questionnaire from the Province for the purpose of jury service. Question 5 asks if I have any physical or mental disability that would prevent me from serving as a juror? 

It's an interesting question. How many people would  recognize or acknowledge  lack of judgement or common sense within themselves? Is that mental instability? Or sagacity and omniscience? 

Is that question asked of Judges being considered for political appointment to the bench ? 

Likely not. 

And yet ?

No comments: