tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post3446043288095912642..comments2023-07-04T09:54:15.920-05:00Comments on Our Town and Its Business: What a Tangled Web was wovenEvelyn Buckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03283458715658096750noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-9541717387470870682013-06-13T18:43:01.212-05:002013-06-13T18:43:01.212-05:003:49 PM
Gee, I didn't mean to open a can of...3:49 PM<br /> Gee, I didn't mean to open a can of worms ! The original comment was about the ability to recognize a conflict. Some have it; others have not. We will see if your prediction is correct. Given the scale of current political turmoil, we are such small potatoes. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-73058453789936355902013-06-13T15:59:57.805-05:002013-06-13T15:59:57.805-05:002:43 - It's not a fight. It is a question of ...2:43 - It's not a fight. It is a question of fair and balanced. <br /><br />If 9:43 who said "Councillors who were involved with any part of that earlier decision must recuse themselves" is suggesting that only Gallo and Gardner are the ones "involved" then he/she is wrong. Buck was also involved - by specifically not participating in a meeting. <br /><br />She may not have a conflict. The other two may not either. However, their involvement, be active or passive could be perceived as a potentially conflicting situation. <br /><br />If you are going to dictate rules, they must be everyone.. not the ones you don't like.<br /><br />It is all moot anyways because none of them are going to recuse themselves. The opportnity to shine in front of their minions is too great. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-48474233761948963752013-06-13T14:43:26.669-05:002013-06-13T14:43:26.669-05:0010:39 AM
May I get into your fight with whoeve...10:39 AM <br /> May I get into your fight with whoever? When have you ever known Councillor Buck to fail to declare a conflict of interest? It seems to me that she errs on the other side, sometimes declaring one when it is not obvious to listeners. So I don't see the significance of your point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-15950914495934310812013-06-13T10:39:31.862-05:002013-06-13T10:39:31.862-05:004:02... if you are the same as 12:57 then the fact...4:02... if you are the same as 12:57 then the fact that you will only have 2 councillors recuse themselves (assuming you are referring to Gallo and Gardner) instead of 3 (including Buck) makes you unbalanced and spiteful. <br /><br />Buck was a sitting councillor at the time. Her being absent from the meeting to me shows that she endorsed it because she elected to not oppose it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-1525400966694759882013-06-12T18:15:03.954-05:002013-06-12T18:15:03.954-05:00A former Era-Banner reporter still keeping tabs on...A former Era-Banner reporter still keeping tabs on developments:<br /><br />http://www.mississauga.com/news-story/3835511-former-aurora-mayor-sues-her-town/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-70761577451929077612013-06-12T16:02:17.413-05:002013-06-12T16:02:17.413-05:00Thank you, 1:58 PM. I was not aware of being unbal...Thank you, 1:58 PM. I was not aware of being unbalanced & spiteful by pointing out the possibility of a conflict of interest. Are you feeling OK ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-32085317698285278072013-06-12T14:35:52.125-05:002013-06-12T14:35:52.125-05:0011:41 AM
We know nothing, zilch, about who might... 11:41 AM<br /> We know nothing, zilch, about who might have stood to benefit or who might have contributed along the way. Anything is possible which might be why 9:43 AM stressed the ' optics. ' ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-23299580622799981522013-06-12T13:58:16.965-05:002013-06-12T13:58:16.965-05:0012:57... then you are not using a balanced argumen...12:57... then you are not using a balanced argument and are spitefulAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-85288485716243491952013-06-11T12:57:12.623-05:002013-06-11T12:57:12.623-05:00@ 11:52 AM
Only 2, if it were my call. Which it...@ 11:52 AM<br /> Only 2, if it were my call. Which it isn't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-61208389110267964412013-06-11T11:52:30.033-05:002013-06-11T11:52:30.033-05:009:43.. so you will have 3 councillors recuse thems...9:43.. so you will have 3 councillors recuse themselves? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-45452236633455699502013-06-11T11:41:56.872-05:002013-06-11T11:41:56.872-05:00@9:43 that makes no sense. Unless they stand to b...@9:43 that makes no sense. Unless they stand to benefit financially, there is no conflict. Just because their position on an issue is known, and even if they had a part in effecting some decision or another, it does not mean that they may not participate if the topic comes up again, or if that prior decision is reconsidered. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-4751390911205397842013-06-11T09:59:51.841-05:002013-06-11T09:59:51.841-05:00
Perhaps Wendy should change her name plaque from ...<br />Perhaps Wendy should change her name plaque from Councillor to Counsellor. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4506868496663273256.post-48540421560905865952013-06-11T09:43:23.554-05:002013-06-11T09:43:23.554-05:00Just an observation
This appears as though... Just an observation<br /> This appears as though Councillors who were involved with any part of that earlier decision must recuse themselves from debate on the subject. They may argue that they are objective but the optics are dreadful for them. I'm afraid they wouldn't<br /> recognize a conflict if it bit them<br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com