Integrity Commissioner

Now that Council has hired their Integrity Commissioner, it will be interesting to watch how they are utilized. There have been a number of accusation made about integrity that would be worthy of consideration.

There has been the refusal to sign the Code of Conduct by Cllr. Buck, and possibly some citizen members. Is it even appropriate to force citizen members to sign? Or the Conflict of Interest accusations around the appointment of Ken Whitehurst? Or even the dismissal of the CAO?

Will the new position be used as a weapon to try to quiet dissenting opinions? Will it be used for a little self-evaluation of their own conduct?

Most importantly, will this third party be able to render third party opinions without having to vet them through Council under the cloak of "In Camera" meetings because of the personnel nature of the issues?

How broad or narrow will the scope be? Remember, they are not full-time. Will they only be used at the discretion of Council, or will citizens have the ability to contact the Commissioner to investigate and report on the behaviours of Council or specific members?

All of these are important questions that need to be answered. Stay tuned, I am sure that activities will shortly start to tell the story.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

5 cent Plastic Bags

Big news today was that Toronto is trying to implement a 5 cent fee for all plastic bags used by stores as part of their strategy to divert materials away from landfill sites.

In Aurora, Councillor Al Wilson initially took a stand about garbage and recycling as a private citizen and included it as part of his election campaign.

Mayor Morris generated considerable personal press on her Right to Dry campaign.

It will be interesting to see whether either champions this program, or whether some other Councillor will take it on. If Toronto can initiate a significant change like this, why can't Aurora. Maybe we can lead the fight for York Region.

This is as big an issue as the packaging issue that was raised in an earlier post. Regardless it will be interesting to see how our Council manages this issue.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Discussion: Train Whistle

Seems to be various points both for and against train whistles here in Aurora. The recent poll indicated that 90% of respondents were against banning train whistles.

However there was also a very good letter in the recent Banner. It made the point that possibly a compromise was the better solution. On its surface it seemed like a very sensible proposal. Certainly worth investigation.

What are your thoughts?

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Discussion: Legal Fees

One reader asked whether the Mayor would consider placing an ad about the legal fees and what they were spent on.

This Council seems on the way to a record for external legal expenses. Shouldn't we know what they are being spent on? Then we can decide whether the dollars (our tax dollars) are being spent on issues of importance to the Town -- or those of importance to Council.

Hopefully this will be part of the budget process and we can all see it broken down by issue and dollars spent. Bouquets to the Councillor who insists on it!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Discussion: Aurora Traffic Woes

The northeast quadrant is proceeding with new speed humps along Mark Street. However, there doesn't seem to any real consensus on whether the residents want these or whether they are having the intended impact.

What role will citizens have with the Traffic Advisory Committee on this issue?

What other traffic issues are we concerned about. Former Council Ron Wallace used to complain bitterly about Yonge and Wellington -- is this still an issue. The new Dundas and Yonge traffic signals may have some learning we can benefit from.

What about the speed zone on St John's where it drops for approx 300 yards from 60 to 50 kms. Most regular travellers along that stretch are well aware of the situation.

What is Wellington and Leslie starting to look like now that the stores are starting to open. Will it end up like in Newmarket leading to/from the big box area?

Traffic flows like water -- to the path of least resistance. Whenever changes are made to one area to lower traffic just moves the traffic elsewhere and becomes someone else's problem.

Until we reduce the cars on the road, the problems will not disappear -- just become someone else's.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Discussion: Unauthorized Spending by Staff

This issue has been one of the most widely commented posts. Possibly because it has raised a number of new and old issues -- all of which have different levels of importance by different people within the community.

In spite of the letters in the local papers from Council, there are many questions still to be asked and answered. There will be more, but these are the ones that immediately come to mind.

1. What is the role of Staff vs Council. Are Council too involved in day-to-day management of the Town affairs versus setting policy? Did staff follow procedures or did they blatantly disregard established procedures?
2. Impact of Council actions on staff morale. Are we getting the best performance from staff or are they hunkering down until the next election?
3. Are some of the issues tied to the loss of so many senior staff since this Council took office? Would the same situation have arisen if we had more seasoned senior staff in place and resultant less burden on the CAO?
4. Why does Council claim to only have found out recently about this issue when The Auroran communicated the issue months ago. See copy of staff memo here courtesy of Cllr Buck.
5. If the repair issues were a matter of safety, how much impact did Council's demonstrated difficult making decisions have on staff actions. Were they damned if they did - damned if they didn't?
6. What is the confidence in Council by the community?
7. What facts are correct and which ones are being manipulated to satisfy different agendas. Shouldn't there only be one agenda -- what is best for the Town?
8. Why do Council keep talking about getting the money returned -- implying that the town is out approx $442,000. The newspapers have reported that the bulk had already been paid by the insurance company and just a smaller amount was still outstanding. Are the papers wrong and if so, why did the letter from Council not clarify this issue. If the newspapers are right, why the implication by Council. How much money is really outstanding to be repaid to the Town?
9. Why has the outstanding dollars for the repairs (which should be pursued by the Town) been tied to inappropriate behaviour by the staff? Staff actions don't appear to have anything to do with this subject, but the message has implied that staff behaviour has lead to this lawsuit. The shouldn't be any connection.
10. It re-opens the CAO termination issue. Was this used a "justification" for firing the CAO? If so, why was there a reported termination package versus dismissal with cause. Is there really cause fore the dismissal, or was this just an excuse? When will the citizens know the facts?

Many of these issues have been the subject of separate posts -- some which are listed at the right side because they were already the Most Popular Posts based on number of comments.

Openness and transparency is used by this Council regularly, it has become their mantra. It was used in both recent letters. However, how open and transparent are they being? Let's continue to push for the full story - then we can make our own decision.

What other questions need to be answered? What is Council doing to answer these questions? The letters are not enough, more information needs to be communicated.

Share your thoughts. What are the important questions/issues to you and how do you think they should be handled.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Diversity is Good!

We teach our children that we live in a diverse world -- one where different points of view are welcome and encouraged. Municipal politics should be no different

The comments on the latest post showed that this blog has started to evolve as a conversation and that is what is intended.

• We had saw some great points made about different side of various issues. Hopefully we will see more.
• We've questioned the facts -- what is really happening at Town Hall and what is the spin -- from either side of the issue. And importantly, we are demanding more transparency.
• We saw people use pseudonyms versus anonymous, so people could track individual perspectives and address their responses to specific people. Thanks "Not Walt" for making that suggestion. So pick you nom de plume and start contributing.
• We've all become bored with "anonymous" who's only contribution to-date has been to complain about the anonymous posts -- while making all their own posts anonymous.

So folks -- congratulations.

Over the weekend, we will start conversation threads on a number of topics that have been discussed, so people can weight in on whatever topics they want.

Also, if there is another topic you would like to see discussed -- send a note or post under your new pseudonyms and we will start a new discussion.

Please take the opportunity to tell your friends and neighbours who share your interest in town affairs to get in on the conversation.

Have a great weekend.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Let the Facts be Known

First, let's congratulate Council for taking the initiative to print ads about some recent issues affecting the town. It seems that the awareness created by this blog and the local newspapers has caused them to recognize that pretending that there are no issues doesn't make them go away.

Hopefully this will be the first of many ads communicating the facts about issues of importance to the community. Let's hope that the oft repeated commitment to "providing open and transparent government" is more than just these couple ads.

With regard to Mr Whitehurst, this issue will continue to dog the Mayor right into the next election. She and others continue to ignore the point about a conflict. The issue is not that he resigned or what he is billing the town -- the conflict is that he voted on an item that had a financial impact on himself personally. It is one of the most clear cut cases of a conflict ever seen. Given the number of times this comes up with regard to members of Council -- it is amazing that they continue to pretend it doesn't exist in this case.

Did we really pay a lawyer $2,144.63 to attend a single meeting as part of an overall $12,345.83 expenditure. To be clear, the taxpayers of the community had to pay a lawyer to defend Council against the very people they were elected to serve so Council could act against the will of the taxpayers and appoint a person of their choosing. Talk about a slap in the face.

As for the unauthorized spending by staff, let's hope a lot more questions get answered. Here are a few-- you probably have more. Send them along and we will publish them.

1. How did Council miss this issue when the Auroran reported on it a number of times?
2. How did cheques get distributed without Council being aware of them? The Mayor and at least 2 Councillors regularly review -- and question staff - on the cheque registry. Where were the questions in this case?
3. If proper procurement procedures are in place -- then how did this slip through? Don't taxpayers deserve to understand what happened and what is being done to fix it. General statements about changing roles and working hard don't provide much reassurance.
4. Was this used as an excuse to dismiss the CAO? It seeems the issue has been known for awhile, but only became public when the CAO was asked to leave. Are staff being blamed to cover the real issue -- that Council simply wanted John Rogers out?

It is offensive that Council is pointing the finger squarely at staff about not following procedures. Where are the checks and balances by Council that should also have been followed. If The Auroran spotted the issue, them why didn't Council?

Hopefully the media will continue to keep up the pressure until all the facts become known.

Keep your comments coming. Only through open dialogue will these and other issues get broadly discussed.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Community Corner: Green Power

A reader sent in the following comment. It is published unchanged.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.

I noticed during a visit to the Town Hall some weeks ago that they're now running on "Bullfrog Power". The website at http://www.bullfrogpower.com/

There is a media release here:
http://www.bullfrogpower.com/08releases/york_aurora.pdf

"The cost to each municipality is three cents per kWh over current electricity commodity rates, representing an annual cost for the Town of Aurora of $20,000 and $70,000 for The Regional Municipality of York.

Bullfrog customers continue to draw power from the electricity grid in the same way that they always have. Customers don't need any special equipment, setup or wiring. Verified annually by an independent audit by Deloitte, the amount of electricity Bullfrog customers buy is injected onto the electricity grid from EcoLogo-certified, green generation sources, including wind power and low-impact water power that displace polluting and carbon-intensive sources such as coal."

I'm not a power expert... but I'm wondering if someone can explain how this works. If you think of it like a liquid...The Town buys $xxx of electricity, Bullfrog 'injects' that amount of electricity into the grid, and it zips it's way along to the town hall, for a premium price.

Are there not laws that say ALL electricity should be as green as possible? The town hall is paying for the generation of the electricity at a premium - 3 cents per kWh over the current rate - but I doubt that there's a way to measure exactly what % of this 'green electricity' is actually used. Going back to the water analogy - isn't it the same idea as the Dasani water sold by Coke that starts out as Mississauga tap water? It's marketed as 'special' and better for you - but how does a consumer REALLY know?

Things that make you go 'hmmmm'.

Share your thoughts.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

British Newspaper Salutes Canadians

This article was published April 21, 2002 by Kevin Myers - The Daily Telegraph, London. It is as relevant today as it was then.

The country the world forgot - again

UNTIL the deaths last week of four Canadian soldiers accidentally killed by a US warplane in Afghanistan, probably almost no one outside their home country had been aware that Canadian troops were deployed in the region. And as always, Canada will now bury its dead, just as the rest of the world as always will forget its sacrifice, just as it always forgets nearly everything Canada ever does.

It seems that Canada's historic mission is to come to the selfless aid both of its friends and of complete strangers, and then, once the crisis is over, to be well and truly ignored. Canada is the perpetual wallflower that stands on the edge of the hall, waiting for someone to come and ask her for a dance. A fire breaks out, she risks life and limb to rescue her fellow dance-goers, and suffers serious injuries. But when the hall is repaired and the dancing resumes, there is Canada, the wallflower still, while those she once helped glamorously cavort across the floor, blithely neglecting her yet again.

That is the price which Canada pays for sharing the North American Continent with the US, and for being a selfless friend of Britain in two global conflicts. For much of the 20th century, Canada was torn in two different directions: it seemed to be a part of the old world, yet had an address in the new one, and that divided identity ensured that it never fully got the gratitude it deserved.
Yet its purely voluntary contribution to the cause of freedom in two world wars was perhaps the greatest of any democracy. Almost 10 per cent of Canada's entire population of seven million people served in the armed forces during the First World War, and nearly 60,000 died. The great Allied victories of 1918 were spearheaded by Canadian troops, perhaps the most capable soldiers in the entire British order of battle.

Canada was repaid for its enormous sacrifice by downright neglect, its unique contribution to victory being absorbed into the popular memory as somehow or other the work of the "British". The Second World War provided a re-run. The Canadian navy began the war with a half dozen vessels, and ended up policing nearly half of the Atlantic against U-boat attack. More than 120 Canadian warships participated in the Normandy landings, during which 15,000 Canadian soldiers went ashore on D-Day alone. Canada finished the war with the third largest navy and the fourth largest air force in the world.

The world thanked Canada with the same sublime indifference as it had the previous time. Canadian participation in the war was acknowledged in film only if it was necessary to give an American actor a part in a campaign which the US had clearly not participated - a touching scrupulousness which, of course, Hollywood has since abandoned, as it has any notion of a separate Canadian identity.

So it is a general rule that actors and film-makers arriving in Hollywood keep their nationality - unless, that is, they are Canadian. Thus Mary Pickford, Walter Huston, Donald Sutherland, Michael J Fox, William Shatner, Norman Jewison, David Cronenberg and Dan Aykroyd have in the popular perception become American, and Christopher Plummer British. It is as if in the very act of becoming famous, a Canadian ceases to be Canadian, unless she is Margaret Atwood, who is as unshakeably Canadian as a moose, or Celine Dion, for whom Canada has proved quite unable to find any takers.

Moreover, Canada is every bit as querulously alert to the achievements of its sons and daughters as the rest of the world is completely unaware of them. The Canadians proudly say of themselves - and are unheard by anyone else - that 1 per cent of the world's population has provided 10 per cent of the world's peace-keeping forces. Canadian soldiers in the past half century have been the greatest peace-keepers on earth - in 39 missions on UN mandates, and six on non-UN peace-keeping duties, from Vietnam to East Timor, from Sinai to Bosnia.

Yet the only foreign engagement which has entered the popular non-Canadian imagination was the sorry affair in Somalia, in which out-of-control paratroopers murdered two Somali infiltrators. Their regiment was then disbanded in disgrace - a uniquely Canadian act of self-abasement for which, naturally, the Canadians received no international credit.

So who today in the US knows about the stoic and selfless friendship its northern neighbour has given it in Afghanistan? Rather like Cyrano de Bergerac, Canada repeatedly does honourable things for honourable motives, but instead of being thanked for it, it remains something of a figure of fun. It is the Canadian way, for which Canadians should be proud, yet such honour comes at a high cost.

This weekend four shrouds, red with blood and maple leaf, head homewards; and four more grieving Canadian families know that cost all too tragically well.

We have much to be grateful for and much to be proud. Lest we forget.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Did Staff Spend Without Authorization?

We should all be concerned about the recent articles in the local newspapers about the expenditure of almost $500,000 without Council approval, after all, it is our money. But before we start pointing fingers we need to have the facts -- or as many as we are able to get.

The questions that need to be asked, must be asked and publicly shared. This will be the true test of openness and transparency.

The other thing we must insist on is that Council stop pointing fingers at staff until the facts are know. This is the true test of leadership. The captain of the ship goes down with the ship -- they don't start pointing fingers as soon as trouble appears.

One must also wonder why Council, particularly Mayor Morris and Evelina MacEachern, both who have a reputation for reviewing the cheque lists, never spotted a cheque of this size. Does that suggest it was purposely not listed?

Based on news reports, another troubling question is regarding the May 2007 letter from NORR (the original architects of the building) where they state that compensation for the repairs would be paid through their insurance company, Pro-Deminity Insurance based on independent tests conducted by NORR that concluded the issues that were brought forward by staff were correct (Feb 2007 letter).

However, after partial payment was received for the repairs, NORR informed staff that the insurance company was not paying any additional funds, leaving the town on the hook for the balance of approx. $60,000.

So a few issues that need review include;

1. Should staff be authorizing payment for expenses that are part of traditional operations? This seems to be a typical operation issue -- work was completed with full Council approval but was not completed correctly and staff followed up to get it done.
2. Is there are dollars amount for all staff purchase above which needs explicit Council approval?
3. Should staff not issue a purchase order for a "flow through" expense that will be paid by a third party -- in this case an insurance company.
4. Why is Mayor Morris quoted as stating that the focus is getting back the $442,000? Didn't the insurance company already pay the largest portion of that with the amount not yet recovered closer to $60,000? Or is that mis-information?

Clearly this is not an exhaustive list, just some of the issues that Council needs to investigate and questions that deserve accurate answers.

The concern is that already residents are being spun that;

1. this is a staff issue and Council has no responsibility,
2. the firing of John Rogers is connected, and
3. information is being communicated by Council that is possibly not accurate (or possibly the papers have added their own spin).

However, until all the facts are know, Council should remember, good people who never signed up for public office are having their reputations tarnished by the conduct of Council. Surely that is outside the code of ethics.

For a different view from the 2 local papers, check out Councillor Buck's blog, as always she has her own view on the subject.

First get the facts -- then communicate them accurately, fairly and openly. The community deserves the truth without the spin!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Community Corner: Staff spending without authorization

A reader sent in the following comment. It is published unchanged.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.

I'd be interested in reaction to the Nov 12 Banner article:"Aurora staff spent $500K without approval." Town embroiled in lawsuits to recoup cost of arena repairs By: By Sean Pearce, Staff Writer The Town of Aurora is locked in a legal battle to recover more than $440,000 in unauthorized spending by staff last year."

Share your thoughts!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Traffic Calming Results Mixed

Good News! A report has been issued about the traffic calming measures in the Northeast quadrant of town. The skinny is that traffic counts are generally down, but the chicanes don't seem to be effective.

Council has taken the initial step to install some speed cushions along Mark Street, but referred the balance to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee.

One of the early criticisms of these measures was that all members of the public hadn't been consulted. Hopefully now the broader public will have the opportunity to engage with this committee versus just a few interested residents.

Another question that needs to be addressed is, "What happened to the traffic that was cutting through this neighbourhood, and what has the impact of that change been to other residents?" Hopefully someone will provide some insight on this issue.

Traffic is like water, it goes to the path of least resistance. Since Yonge and Wellington hasn't been fixed, one has to wonder if the traffic has just become a problem for another neighbourhood.

This is a good news story. In fact, even the Mayor is quoted as stating "We want to remain open and transparent as we mover forward on this."

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

A Pittance of Time

Terry Kelly, a Canadian singer, created this video to commemorate the sacrifice of our armed forces.

Given our busy schedules and the fact that many of the veterans who fought in the world wars are no longer here to remind us of the sacrifice of war, this video demonstates how important a role our children play in remembering our past and creating our future.

You can see it on YouTube or on his website. It is worth the time to view it.

Something to think about. Lest we Forget!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Community Corner: Closed Door Meetings

A reader sent in the following comment. It is published unchanged.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.

I found an interesting item on the Council agenda for the October 14/08 meeting. Could you please open this as a topic of discussion? I think it's quite suspicious that two councillors are fighting for transparency and the other are fighting against it. This was a fantastic suggestion by Mrakas. How is one to "investigate" a closed session meeting if there is no record?

6. Motion from Councillor Collins-Mrakas
Re: Audio Recording of Closed-Session Meetings
(Notice was provided to Council on Tuesday September 9, 2008)

Moved by Councillor Collins-Mrakas Seconded by Councillor Buck

WHEREAS the closed session meetings and attendant proceedings of Council are subject to investigation at anytime should a member of the public feel it is warranted; and

WHEREAS the accuracy of the records and/or documentation kept in regards to the closed session meetings and proceedings of Council is therefore vital; and

WHEREAS currently only minutes are taken and there is no verbatim – written or audio-recorded record of the closed session proceedings of Council; and

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, if permitted under relevant legislation, all future closed session meetings of Council shall be audio-recorded.

DEFEATED

--------------

An interesting question. A very small number of topics are allowed in-camera because the discussion may be harmful to people or the town if discussed in open Council.

Examples would be an interest to sell/purchase real estate, talk about someones performance and possible dismissal or a legal matter. One can easily see that some matters should be discussed behind closed doors.

However, no decisions are to be made in-camera. All items must be presented in open council for a decision to be made (obviously all the details are not shared).

However, there has been concern expressed by the Mayor and certain members of council that inappropriate behaviour is taking place behind these closed doors. Public accusations can be made about something said and the accused has no defence.

Similarly, discussions take place that lead to a decision and the public have a right to know the basis for the decision -- for example on a real estate matter.

Having a recording that can be released when the item becomes public would help us all understand what took place.

Clearly personal information needs to be withheld, but the comments that it doesn't allow for a free discussion is nonsense. What are these folks saying that they don't want the public to hear?

One might conclude it is the inappropriate behaviour that is the concern versus the release of personal information. These concerns sound more like a desire to hide their own behaviour versus concerns for privacy that can be simply solved by editing out details about a person or legal matter.

Lastly, these tapes would only be made available when an issue is raised , either by the public or a member of council, similar to requesting a transcript or recording of current meetings. So the cost is basically a tape recording hook up connected to the current recording equipment.

Seems like a simple fix. So why the problem?

Admittedly, this is a new idea. It is not practiced in other municipalities. So there is no precedence.

But one must wonder, what's the issue? Isn't it a step forward in promoting openness and transparency? Council is willing to show leadership with clotheslines, why not with openness and transparency? After all, it was the big promise from the election -- while I don't recall anything said about clotheslines.

Let us know your thoughts.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

What goes around comes around!

I recently re-read this story. I don't know with certainty if it is true, but I thought the story was worth sharing.

----------------------

His name was Fleming, and he was a poor Scottish farmer. One day, while trying to make a living for his family, he heard a cry for help coming from a nearby bog. He dropped his tools and ran to the bog.

There, mired to his waist in black muck, was a terrified boy, screaming and struggling to free himself. Farmer Fleming saved the lad from what could have been a slow and terrifying death.

The next day, a fancy carriage pulled up to the Scotsman's sparse surroundings. An elegantly dressed nobleman stepped out and introduced himself as the father of the boy Farmer Fleming had saved. "I want to repay you," said the nobleman. "You saved my son's life."

"No, I can't accept payment for what I did," the Scottish farmer replied, waving off the offer. At that moment, the farmer's own son came to the door of the family hovel. “Is that your son?" the nobleman asked. "Yes," the farmer replied proudly.

"I'll make you a deal. Let me provide him with the level of education my son will enjoy. If the lad is anything like his father, he'll no doubt grow to be a man we both will be proud of." And he did.

Farmer Fleming's son attended the very best schools, and in time,he graduated from St. Mary's Hospital Medical School in London, and went on to become known throughout the world as the noted Sir Alexander Fleming, the discoverer of Penicillin.

Years afterward, the same nobleman's son who was saved from the bog was stricken with pneumonia. What saved his life this time? Penicillin.

The name of the nobleman? Lord Randolph Churchill. His son's name? Sir Winston Churchill.

Someone once said: What goes around comes around. It is a great lesson we can all benefit from the reminder.

Pass this on, and brighten someones day. Nothing will happen if you do not pass it along. The only thing that will happen, if you DO pass it on, is that someone might smile because of you.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Community Corner: 2009 Lawn care vs. Town of Aurora Pesticide Ban

A reader sent in the following comment. It is published unchanged.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.

I sent the following email to Mayor Morris on October 16th, 2008 as I am sitting on an invoice from my lawn care company. I have yet to hear a response from her. I have also sent the same email to Councillor Collin-Mrakis and not had a response. What should the public do when we cannot get answers from our elected officials? I have lost the early payment discount that I was eligible for. I thought it would be best to send this to the Mayor as she vets everything from staff anyways.

---------------------------------

Mayor Morris,

I have for a number of years contracted with Weed Man for lawn care. I have received their 2009 schedule and prior to my authorizing payment, I have asked them to assure me that they are compliant with the Town's bylaw. They tell me that they are compliant in that they use a product called Sarritor. The actual bylaw does not speak to actual product brand names. Can you tell me if Sarritor satisfies this bylaw or pass the request to the appropriate person for a determination?

As well, they tell me that they will still have to place a warning sign on my lawn (Federal regulations). Will I have to endure bylaw officers knocking on my door with a summons because this sign is on my lawn? In order for this product to work, I also will have to water the lawn for 15-20 minutes three days in a row. My other concern here is that as you know, the Town operates under a limited outdoor water use bylaw that would place me in a position of violation in order to properly activate this lawn care product. What is the Town's viewpoint on this situation?

Thank you.
-------------------------------

Aurora Citizen: How are other citizens dealing with the issue of our pesticide ban? Share your thoughts.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Code of Ethics?

So do tell -- under what part of the much vaunted Code of Ethics is it covered that when the public show concern about an action of Council that you just wait until the issue dies down and do what you want anyway?

This exactly what happened with the appointment of Ken Whitehurst to the position of interim Director -- a mere 2 months after the issue was front page news in the local paper and reported in this blog. I guess they hoped everyone would forget about the issue and they would slide it by without anyone noticing. Thanks to Councillor Buck for bringing it to our attention at a recent Council meeting.

We won't "rehash" this item because we know how much this offends the supporters of the Mayor. It just gets in the way of doing what they want without people being aware of their behaviour.

Well we thought it was important to bring it to people's attention.

Judge for yourself -- agree or disagree -- then talk to your neighbours. But make sure you are aware of what your elected representatives are doing without telling you. So much for transparency!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Traffic Calming in Northeast Quadrant

So what the verdict? Was there not supposed to a study on this initiative and a final decision made?

We are entering the second winter with these measures in place and there has been no report published that reviews the feelings of residents -- both those inside and outside the affected area. It would be interesting to hear what the neighbourhood as whole has to say about these measures.

Plus, what about the safety issues -- particularly in the snow. What was the impact of the calming measures?

Is it working? Is it safe? Was this initiative a success? Is there consensus by the residents that this was good idea, or did it just serve a few?

What are your thoughts?

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Flop-flop or sober reflection?

Council has once again demonstrated their difficultly making a well thought through decision. This time on windrows.

One cannot help but wonder how much consultation was done with the affected folks -- the seniors who are to "benefit" from this service -- before the decision was made to implement the pilot project.

How hard would it have been to have set up a meeting with the seniors to discuss the issue and asked them for their input before making a decision. If they had, they certainly would have heard the feedback recently provided. Or is this just another example of responding to the most recent squeaky wheel?

It does not inspire much confidence in their decision-making process when simple things like clearing windrows requires so much time and reversal of decisions. It's no wonder more critical decisions are such a burden on their collective abilities.

It's time this Council showed some leadership and did their homework before making decisions. I think we would all sleep better.

What do you think? Should the town subsidize the plowing of windrows? Check out the poll!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.