Posts
Councillor MacEachern seems to have created another set of rules. See it live starting at 2:52:00. 18 minutes of classic Morris MacEachern.
Decide for yourself if this was a well orchestrated performance. Councillor MacEachern just happened to have her references to the procedural bylaws to support her twisted logic -- and the 5 just fell in line! Imagine a vote of 5 against 3 on the Mayors ruling on her Point of Order.
If this was planned in advance, it also puts comments by Mayor Morris to Mr Hogg about this very topic in a different context.
If Councillor MacEachern was sincere in her statements about working as a team, wouldn't she have raised this with Councillor McRoberts in advance and given him a chance to adjust his motion -- rather than trying to embarrass him.
Since when is a Notice of Reconsideration required to remove anything from the website. Based on this rationale, therefore any item that has been approved by Council to be included on the website, The Notice Board, etc. by motion must run in perpetuity unless it is removed by a formal Notice of Reconsideration -- unless a specific removal date is included in the initial motion.
Wouldn't a Notice of Reconsideration mean that they would not put something up. Since it is already up -- it doesn't make any sense. As Councillor McRoberts said, putting up versus taking down are 2 different issues.
Possibly Councillor MacEachern would provide examples where this has been done in the past. Or where a Notice of Reconsideration was used to remove anything that was deemed to be no longer relevant or was outdated.
How about it Councillor MacEachern? As a regular reader of this blog -- and you must be since you claim it is unbalanced, and we know you would never make a statement this definitive without personal knowledge -- here is a perfect opportunity to provide the balance you desire.
Refer us to the minutes where this has happened in the past.
You couldn't ask for a better demonstration of the style and quality of character and leadership on this Council.
If you are real glutton for punishment -- watch the next section where they dissect the motion to have citizens input on the code. Another classic.
FOOT NOTE: The Banner article
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
Here's what I don't get.
Why not call her up or e-mail her to ask her?
You attack, put it on your blog, your blog that has its own agenda.
You want her to fight with you on your turf, answer your accusations?
From my reading of this blog, I've watched more Council meetings, and have skim-read Evelyn Buck's blog.
It has had the unintended consequence of leaving me rooting for the "others".
They do their business openly.
I'm rooting for them because they haven't lowered themselves to incessant name calling and accusations on blogs.
As I have said before, the exact same thing happened in the case of the power supply issue.
Northland Power did meet with town staff as well as the Mayor but they also tried for two years to meet with Council in order to educate them and answer questions. Mayor Morris agreed at one point to permit an information session and then apparently changed her mind.
At the final hour she gave Northland and a representative from the OPA ten minutes to present to council on this critically important and pressing issue. Council then proceeded to ask questions for over an hour about some of the most basic things that they should have known the answers to at least six to twelve months prior. Despite the excellent answers provided, Councillor McEachern pulled out a lengthy motion that was clearly pre-drafted and the Mayor played her part. The motion passed, rejecting local generation.
It clearly did not matter what was said in the presentation or Q&A session given that the preferred outcome had already been predetermined. It looked very orchestrated to me. Northland Power then held an open house the following night and the two Councillors that attended both apparently said independently that they wished they had known the full story before voting the previous night (or words to that effect).
Despite the many efforts made by the OPA, APPrO, power companies and other informed individuals to educate the Mayor and Council the information provided clearly fell on deaf ears. Council and most notably the Mayor, did not appear to understand the underlying identified need or the viable alternatives and they chose to allow Sue Walmer of EAC, who knew next to nothing about the history of the issue or power planning in general, to write a position paper for a group called MegaWHAT that was nothing short of ridiculous, which views were apparently adopted or at the very least supported by the Mayor in order to suit her own political objectives.
At the same time, EAC also incidentally refused the participation of a power company engineer who also just so happened to be the local Green Party representative from participating on EAC because of a perceived conflict, but that did not stop Sue Walmer (the Head of EAC) from writing a position paper for a community based activist group, which the Mayor insisted she had not done until it the position paper with Sue's name on it (front and center) came out at which time the Mayor lead the parade lead by Sue and MegaWHAT into the Regional Council Chambers with balloons and all (which were not allowed), in order to delegate to the Regional Council.
The whole experience at Aurora Council was a complete mess and the Hydro Task Force watched on as the Mayor allowed Council to bumble along.
The Mayor to this day has no idea what the implications of all of this were on Ontario's power planning procurement process or the Region, but suffice it to say that it was not a positive influence from my perspective, especially when you look at what has subsequently transpired.
Aurora was in a position to proactively find a solution for the Region and set a new and higher standard for power planning procurement processes given that this was one of the first major projects being procured by the newly created Ontario Power Authority (OPA) but instead, the Mayor appears to have played politics in order to satisfy a small group of apparently very poorly informed and self interested people; at least that is how I see it.
This Council continues to act in Character.
I agree with September 18, 2009 7:30 AM
What assurance's are there that the AC will post all comments that support Evalina.
I've seen my notes not get posted. The one that springs to mind is the comment on the Morris and Hogg history of their political roots. I thought it was very innocent. Maybe I made the mistake of putting their names together in one sentence.
Obviously this blog has an agenda. Perhaps Bill Hogg has a greater roll in it than he cares to admit.
Maybe that's why every one has an interest in who the moderator is?
Here the glass is never half full or half empty.
It's always empty.
Clearly the GOS want to keep the complaint up on the web site. It was not a "reconsideration". I can just imagine Mor-Mac sitting up all night reading the procedural by-law to find an out.
Perhaps McRoberts should, in parallel with his original request to remove the complaint, propose that the IC's report be added to the web site to provide closure to the issue.
Fuimus
Why can't the Town Clerk just be called the Town Clerk?
The following corporate lingo-laden job listing is on the Town's website:
Director, Customer and Legislative Services
The Town of Aurora invites you to join our growing and innovative organization which offers individuals the opportunity to make a positive contribution to our community. Members of our Senior Management Team are champions of public service. They are committed to our community and lead our organization by creating a clear sense of direction and in turn support their business units in the delivery of public service by ensuring that we strive to be an organization that is: customer-focused, solutions-oriented and accountable. Their purpose is to inspire others in the relentless pursuit of Building a Better Place.
Reporting to the Chief Administrative Officer, this newly created position will be responsible for providing strategic advice and making recommendations on various issues ensuring that the services offered are aligned with the needs of a growing community. You will have responsibility for customer care and legislative services and will be expected to provide leadership that ensures public participation, respects partnerships and values relationships. You will create an environment that encourages individual commitment and growth, fosters teamwork, and recognizes the importance of excellent customer relationships. Responsible for legislative services you will ensure compliance with policies and statutory requirements. Planning, co-ordination and control of the activities and business affairs of the department as a whole, you will have overall responsibility for managing the constantly changing and increasingly complex day-to-day affairs including Council / Committee Secretariat, Records Management, Procurement, Licensing, Municipal Elections and associated Policy Administration. You will lead a staff of dedicated professionals and play a key role with the planning and executing of the Town’s strategic vision that meets both current and future needs.
Current municipal senior management experience in legislative and customer service is required along with a university degree in Public Administration or related discipline. The successful incumbent will have a thorough working knowledge of municipal functions and responsibilities, applicable legislation and regulations, Council secretariat functions, corporate records and information management, purchasing, elections requirements and processes, the statutory responsibilities of a Municipal Clerk; and a thorough working knowledge of customer service principles, practices, concepts, techniques, and strategies. Your ability to provide leadership, influence others and foster positive working relationships with people of varying backgrounds and viewpoints is complemented with your strong sense of community service and commitment to providing exceptional customer service.
In addition to the superb location, we offer a competitive benefits package, a “lieu time” policy, training and development opportunities, and a formal system of performance management which rewards contribution with progression in the salary range. We invite you to forward your resume to Human Resources, Town of Aurora, 1 Municipal Drive, Box No. 1000, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 6J1 or email to: hr@e-aurora.ca by September 30, 2009.
To Anonymous Sept 18 7:30AM
Have you ever tried to talk with McEchren. I have and it was not a pleasant situation.
Good to know members of Council are diligent with their homework.
Kudos to them.
Keeps everyone on their toes and gives the mystery moderator grist for the mill.
What's not to like?
Win win all around.
Go team go... until the hockey season pulls me away.
Check out this new job posting on the Town of Aurora site.
"Director, Customer and Legislative Services"
http://www.town.aurora.on.ca/aurora/index.aspx?ArticleID=2955&lang=en-CA
A "newly created" position?
However, it includes "the statutory responsibilities of a Municipal Clerk."
A reincarnation of the position of Town Clerk?
Don't Director level positions have to be approved by council?
Just one more year of this nonsense.
Can't wait for change.
To September 18 @ 7:30 am
You are joking of course!! Whenever I have emailed councillor Maceachern directly either asking a question or about a concern, I either get no response at all or a sarcastic, nasty, disrespectful retort.
I guess 6 councillors can be as rude as they wish to residents and to 3 other councillors but not to staff in this town.I have also never had a response from the mayor, or Granger. At least here, there is a chance to be read and responded to.
To September 18 @ 12:47
Did you notice though, that like some current councillors, it does not stipulate being literate as a requirement?
"You have reached www.evelynbuck.com, the site is temporarily offline"
Anybody know what happened?
I watched part of the last Council meeting on TV and noticed 3 procedural errors very early in the meeting. I didn’t even get to the reconsideration fiasco.
The first one was during Bill Hogg's delegation; Evelina was permitted to ask a question that did not relate to Mr. Hogg's comments. The Mayor/Chair did nothing.
2. A delegate requested a parking restriction be lifted from Mary Street. The Mayor/Chair started to ask for a motion, stopped and then proceeded to ask staff all sorts of questions on an issue which was not properly on the table - no one had made any motions. Finally after she completed a discussion with at least 3 staff members, a motion was allowed. Talk about manipulating the outcome.
3. Evelyn raised issues with the format of the agenda and after some back and forth with her, the Clerk and the Chair the matter was put to rest. Immediately thereafter Wilson was permitted by the Chair to make a "snotty" remark about how long agendas had been in that format. The comment was out of order and unnecessary at best, and antagonistic and argumentative at worst. Again, no comment from the Mayor/Chair.
For a group that claims to have such high regard for process and procedures and Wilson claiming he wants to "move on", it certainly isn't displayed in their actions.
This comment does not altogether pertain directly to the topic but I have had something on my mind for quite some time now and Tuesday's council meeting was a blatant illustration of my concern.
What I observed on Tuesday night and have seen occur with increasing frequency is ageism and abuse. It is insidious and sometimes disguised more heavily than at other times but it IS abuse and ageism.
I have witnessed bullying, particularly by Mayor Morris and Councillor Mceachern. The ageism is displayed as sneering, smirking, condescension and patronizing toward Councillor Buck. The Mayor and Councillor Maceachern use all methods; Councillors Gaertner, Wilson, Granger and Gallo primarily resort to the non-verbal methods but Wilson and Gaertner are not averse to chipping in with comments too.
I have studied and written papers about ageism in today's society and it may be the precursor or may often go hand in hand with elder abuse. Ageism refers to discrimination against any age group. I think it is clear that I am specifically referring to the elder age group.
The behaviour on Tuesday night was particularly shameful. Society used to respect,revere and protect the elders of the community generations. It was very clear that six of the leaders of Aurora have thrown their hats in with the modern view and treatment of our elders. How they disgust me when they have the gall to talk about respect and integrity.
"You have reached www.evelynbuck.com, the site is temporarily offline"
Anybody know what happened?
Yes, there are some issues, but the blog is still there at www.evelynmbuck.blogspot.com
Bokmark that one if you read it frequently.
Please explain what Heather's posted comment has to do with this posting.
Why was it published?
Is Buck synonymous with this blog?
Once again there seems to be a close connection.
I would say that Heather’s comments answer the question asked by anonymous at Sept. 18 7:54.
What does your post have to do with this topic?
Something Fishy in Aurora,
What do your post & the other 2 posts you mentioned have to do with "Notice of Reconsideration--Where's the Precedence"?
Indeed & after this blog said they censored only comments that were "off" topic.
To quote a much esteemed poster, "Hmmm".
I agree with you: just another fishy smell in Aurora on Aurora Citizen.
I think, Something Fishy in Aurora, they are attempting to create the impression that this blog and Cllr Buck are nefariously connected. ("they" being the ever-decreasing cadre of Morris supporters)
It is a concerted effort to demonize this blog, as Mrs Buck has been made an enemy of the ruling elite. It shows the desperation of these MorMac apologists that they're trying to negatively objectify this blog.
In the wake of MacEachern's failed attempt to put Bill Hogg on the spot re: the Aurora Citizen, they may feel the need for more deflection. The sight of Cllr MacEachern's quaking performance in her abortive ambush versus Mr Hogg's able rebuttal may have led to this latest offensive.
... Just suppositions and speculations on the scheming and skullduggery to which the apologists will stoop...
"("they" being the ever-decreasing cadre of Morris supporters)
It is a concerted effort to demonize this blog, as Mrs Buck has been made an enemy of the ruling elite. It shows the desperation of these MorMac apologists that they're trying to negatively objectify this blog."
I don't fit the label, but probably posted a comment that you have included in your categories.
Why can't I post a comment without being demonized?
I'm not part of the "ruling elite", a phrase I don't understand in relation to Aurora. Who belongs to that group? Who decides?
Am I then invisible, of no merit?
Is there no room for an individual to post without being aligned with a particular faction?
Please explain why I am so easily dismissed.
Interesting thought for those that have followed Aurora Council over the years. At the beginning of the last term for Tim Jones, Councillor at the time, Phyllis Morris made a grand stink re: the offsite orientation meeting. She postured and fought against it and even questioned its legality under the Municipal Act. To make a long story short after much acrimonious debate Morris lost her argument and ultimately (and as history shown hypocritically) boycotted the event along with her neophyte
diciple one Wndy Gaertner. To placate Ms Morris Council commissioned George Rust'eye (the lawyer Ms. Morris now sings glorious praises of) to rule on once and for all the legality of offsite meetings. Surprising to no one he ruled they were legal and again Aurora Taxpayers footed the bill for legal fees because Ms. Morris had some deluded idea about meetings. Today, under Ms. Morris' leadership frivolous legal costs continue.It just seems ironic that Mr Rust'eye had already called out Ms. Morris as being full of it once before! Talk about precedence.
It matters not what how brilliant, thoughtful and appropriate the matters are that McRoberts, Collins-Mrakas and Buck present to the GO5 at Council. They will NEVER see the light of day because they are contiuously voted down. Why? Because they can. That's all this is about and that's why McRoberts can try all he wanta to get the Code of Conduct reviewed with taxpayer input. Won't happen. Nadda. They (lead by evil eyed MacEachern) want Buck brought ot her knees.
Thank you Broderick for recalling that story. Fast forward to Morris as Mayor - NO she decreed, there would not be an offsite for a Council with 6 brand new members who may have benefited greatly, BUT, please Council (Go5) allow me to attend the Regional offsite so that I can bond with my new colleagues! Hypocrite Morris!
Anonymous - September 18, 2009 7:30 AM
"Here's what I don't get.
Why not call her up or e-mail her to ask her?"
Perhaps the idea of discussing it on a blog is to invite discussion, a one one one communication does not offer that. It is quite apparent that neither you nor the GOS understands the purpose of blogs.
".They do their business openly."
You mean behind closed doors, and by block voting.
You are right, council is very transparent in its operations, they are hardly subtle.
They are continually hoisted by their own petard.
"I'm rooting for them because they haven't lowered themselves to incessant name calling and accusations on blogs."
Again you are right, they do their name calling and accusing openly!
Lets not forget bullying.
All of which are much nicer when done in person.
Enjoy rooting for them while you can, November 2010 will bring Aurora what it deserves.....something better.
Ok, it's time to play the guessing game.
Which member of Council sent the following e-mail on February-09-08 12:24 AM to "all-council" in addition to Al Wilson and one other councillor ?
For bonus points you can guess which "other" councillor was on the receiving end or guess what the Mayor did about it, if anything.
Please note that there is one condition that must be met in order to play. Contestants MUST have "a handle" other than "Anonymous" and any one will do. Here are a few potential examples:
"MacEachern for Mayor (officially), "said...
"Morris for Emperor" said...
"Out with the old and in with the new" said...
"Vote for change" said...
"Vote for more of the same, why not, it's fun" said...
"Here's hoping" said...
You get the idea. Take a side, take a name and take a guess. It's that easy !
Here is the mystery quote and please note that it was sent in a massive bold type face, just like you would expect from a co-worker:
"Bravo Councillor Wilson!!!!!!!!!!!
The only Jack Ass I know is the one with the big mouth!!!!!!!!!!!"
That was a silly question. Could it be from the same person who emailed that one of the councillors must have mad cow disease?
Perhaps some brave soul will pay the money for a Freedom of Information Act access to the emails the Integrity Commissioner sent BEFORE the ruling?
Also, emails on personal accounts through the town's computer system and servers might be at issue.As Mayor Morris claims to be a town employee, the use of town property in an inappropriate manner could come into play.
Council Cop said...
"Ok, it's time to play the guessing game."
Does she look like she often gargles with vinegar?
Ok, I'll play - my guess is:
MacEachern sent it and the "other" Councillor copied was Buck!
In fact I think I may remember seeing the incident at a televised Council meeting that would have given rise to the email!
The big contest closes shortly so be sure to make your guess soon !
Anyone that has not guessed yet should know that they are up against some stiff competition...
With so many emails floating around, why don't any of them surface in the print media?
To Help Wanted September 23, 2009 8:24 AM
I guess someone will have to ask the Mayor, Council and the media why Evlina gets a free pass.
Post a Comment