Friday, October 9, 2009

Not Quite Business as Usual

Springwater Township Council – Oct 5
“The Peasants are revolting; They certainly are!” I always loved that line from Harvey Korman in the satirical movie History of the World. I am sure that was Mayor Guergis feelings toward Deputy Mayor Hope and some councillors at the Monday Oct 5th Council meeting. As I was staring at the protruding screws in the ceiling of our multi million dollar administration centre and listening to the drone of the normal orchestrated dealing with township matters, I was jolted out of my daze when I heard Deputy Mayor Hope table a motion seconded by Councillor Cowan that the rules of procedure be suspended to deal with a number of matters. I knew something was up. I assumed the reason for the motion was to prevent the Mayor from exercising his authority as chair to stop discussions on matters that he may not want to hear, as has happened a number times since February. The Deputy Mayor outlined a number of concerns that he wanted discussed. First was the Mayor's removal of Ms. Kearney's correspondence regarding Site 41 from the correspondence section of the Sept 21st Council meeting agenda. Secondly Hope questioned why the correspondence from Tiny Township including a copy of their motion requesting the stopping of all development of Site 41, was not on the same agenda. The next two items were not totally clear but it appeared to be a concern that the credibility of the entire Springwater Council was being brought into question because of the Mayor's stand on Site 41 which was contrary to the wishes of Council and more importantly the citizens the Council represents. There was also some further concern about some rant the mayor had with the councilors outside of the public forum and comments made by people about their lack of confidence in the mayor.
The mayor undoubtedly surprised at the list of concerns would have been best to remain silent until all the issues had been tabled. But in his typical fashion he first of all tried to deflect the discussion with such words and phrases as, “I am shocked”, “I must apologize for the behaviour you are seeing here tonight”, “Is this the way we are going to communicate for the next 14 months”, “how is this bringing our community together” and so on. Once he realized this rhetoric was not working, the answers started coming. The Mayor's response to the first item regarding the Kearney correspondence was interesting. He stated that the Mayor and Clerk have the authority to include or remove items that may or may not be relevant to the business of the township. He admitted he had asked that the Kearney correspondence not be included on the agenda. As a point of order, it is the Clerk not the Mayor that has the authority to decide the items on the agenda, as it is the Clerk's job to ensure that politically motivated agendas of the elected officials are avoided. If you go through the past minutes you will find many pieces of correspondence that have no bearing on the business of Council and are simply received. A number of months ago for example, the Town of Innisfil made a deputation and Council supported a resolution opposing Barrie's annexation bid. That is no business of Springwater. Even on the agenda for Oct 5th there was correspondence and a requested resolution from Clearview that was received as correspondence. The fact that the Kearney letter which dealt with Site 41 was left off the agenda is certainly suspect. I can only assume the Mayor, attempting to avoid a three ring circus at the council meeting, did not want a resolution passed at the Springwater Council the day prior to the County Council voting on ceasing all development at site 41. After hearing about the pick and choose approach, Councilor Collins expressed a great concern about how items for the agenda may be selected and questioned whether there may have been other matters that had been deleted in the past. The clerk commented that issues that are distant from Springwater would not be included. On the second point regarding the omission of the Tiny correspondence and resolution on the Sept 21st agenda, I must accept the explanation of the Clerk, as I have found her to be quite forthright on matters, even when I have not agreed with her position. She stated she was on vacation when it was received and it accidentally got lost in the shuffle. I know it sounds suspicious but based on the Clerk's comments, the Mayor should not be accused of influencing this item and I can accept that he did not remove it from the agenda. We of course will never know what he might have done if the correspondence had not been misplaced. I will give him the benefit of doubt on that one. On the final items of Deputy Mayor Hope, I feel that these items would have been better vetted behind closed doors as the Mayor was caught off guard and not properly prepared which was not fair in my estimation. I understand the frustration and flack that some councillors have received and can agree that the councillors have been tarred with the same brush because of the Mayor's outspoke support of Site 41. As far as the mayor's rants, challenges and confrontations with certain councillors on various matters and their positions outside of the public forum, I would have preferred to see more specific information as I did not fully understand the purpose of that part of the discussion. I do think the Deputy Mayor's last two items were possibly inappropriate as they attacked more the person of the Mayor rather than the position he holds.
The interesting anecdote is that none of this discussion should have occurred until the Council past the resolution to suspend the procedural bylaw. No wonder Councillor Clement was confused and asked for clarification when it came time to vote on it after the fact.
Most people in business realize that there is an acceptable or functional level of conflict that is healthy as it leads to constructive and productive debate and results in progress. It is a delicate balance however. Dysfunctional conflict at one extreme is when there is no conflict and everyone nods their head to avoid a scene. Some refer to it as group think. I believe we saw a lot of that in this term of council as most councillors did not want to get into a conflict or confrontation with the mayor and simply agreed with him on many items. I think the Mayor compounded the frenzy at this meeting by his sarcasm, intimidation, condescension and threatening remarks. Councillor Caldwell correctly remarked that there was no need for the Mayor to use sarcasm in his comments. However, I can understand the Mayor's surprise at the attacks and he most likely reacted as many people do by providing a defence. Unfortunately in his position, the sarcasm becomes unacceptable.
The only way that the councillors themselves can escape the damage that has been done by the Mayor's outspoken Site 41 stance is to talk to their constituents and make them aware that they are there for the best interests of the citizens of Springwater and that they deal with many matters, not just Site 41. If this had been done over the last six months, I am not sure that the Mayor's actions would have had the same impact on their credibility. If I were on council I would conduct town hall meetings in my ward every three months and update the constituents on what is happening and try to ascertain their needs rather than supporting someone else's agenda..
Here is another suggestion to alleviate the lack of confidence of the electorate. Possibly the council meetings once a month could be changed by adding a ten minute open forum to the agenda allowing anyone to speak on matters before council or any other matter that has not been addressed, without the necessity of requesting a delegation before council. Giving people 2 minutes each to speak is a great way of being transparent and gaining insight into what people want. I don't think Council would be swamped by requests as there is typically me and maybe four others at the meetings unless something specifically impacting area residents is on the agenda. This open forum would somewhat negate the opinion that this council is highly secretive and always does things behind closed doors.
I found in my many years of dealing with people, that trust and credibility is a two way street. Dictating and demanding blind trust of your peers, subordinates or constituents is not possible. Trust, credibility and honesty must come from the inner self and then radiate outwards before those characteristics will be recognized by anyone else. I have no doubt the mayor has the potential to be an effective leader. Unfortunately the high expectations and potential of many people go unrealized. I for one assisted Mayor Guergis in getting elected and was confident in what he said during the election campaign. I was looking forward to a new open and transparent council. Based on the last 34 months performance, none of those promises have been forthcoming and things are worse than ever.
After everything is said and done, and council is still concerned about the mayor's behaviour, they should table and pass a resolution and have the Mayor's conduct investigated by a special investigator appointed by the province as permitted in the Municipal Act. That is what Barrie did with their mayor two years ago. The other possibility is for everyone on this Council to get behind closed doors and vent all their concerns and frustrations and develop a new approach to how the council conducts its business. Without that, it will be business as usual and nothing will be accomplished by the debate and lost tempers at the meeting. On a brighter note, I did see the start of something positive if some of the councillors are willing to take a stand and focus on the business of the township. In some situations on council it is as simple as saying, “I don't agree with that because....”. I think the mayor must also realize this is not a party system and he cannot demand that the councillors toe the party line and stay in step.
Our mayor continues to confuse me with this statement, “We don't seem to be getting the message out”. My advice to the mayor and the rest of council is that you first must decide what is the message and then talk to people one on one, not undertake an expensive PR campaign such as we have witnessed at the County level.
The business of the township is important to all of us. It is our tax dollars that are being spent. We elect and pay the politicians to be the stewards of our township. I encourage readers to get involved and come to the Planning and Council meetings as the decisions made at these two key meetings impact the way we live and enjoy our fine Township. To stay current with local news read the Springwater News.

Bill French
Grenfel
http://springwatercitizens.blogspot.com/