True, they don’t really care if public consultation is legitimate but what they do care about is that it at least appears half legitimate or better. Our new Mayor has turned this into a world class fiasco and it’s getting worse by the day. Having one municipal Councillor on a 7 person, 7 vote committee is one thing. Replacing that Councillor after she has resigned, with the Mayor AND while having two of his buddies on the committee is ridiculous. David Marks may very well be known and respected in his field (hydrogeology). The Mayor has advised that he will be doing part time hydrogeological consulting work on behalf of Woolwich Township. So far so good but then it becomes ridiculous. The Mayor has appointed him as a voting member on CPAC. The Mayor has appointed himself Chair of CPAC. David Marks can work in Guelph but other than being the Mayor’s friend don’t you think living here for the last few years as well as now might be a consideration? Don’t you think taking money from the Mayor and Council while voting on CPAC beside the Mayor is a conflict of interest? He is not a resident of Woolwich Township and thus has no business as a voting member on this committee.
Regarding the title above, I e-mailed a number of big shots in the Ministry this past Sunday. Along with the ongoing drama around the current membership I also made sure that the M.O.E. knew about how the old CPAC were summarily rejected. At the time I thought this was from the Township’s position of knowledge. In hindsight it was just as much from their position as petty bureaucrats.
In regards to fulfilling my promise to release more of the e-mails to the Mayor, CAO of Woolwich and Councillor Herteis from their CPAC appointees I am having second thoughts. The content of these e-mails from my CPAC colleagues went to proving that the majority of CPAC were initially confused, then upset and finally outraged by the Township’s obfuscation, stalling and verbal drivel. Many of the comments from my CPAC colleagues are highly critical as they should be. That being said the fact is that two wrongs rarely if ever make a right. It has been respectfully suggested to me that there is a certain violation and betrayal of trust involved in releasing publicly what were meant to be private communications. I am of two minds when I consider that the contents generally speak to the misbehaviour of elected officials in regards to CPAC. Therefore today will be a comprimise. I am releasing an e-mail but it does not speak critically of the Township Staff or Politicians. It shouldn’t be the least bit disconcerting to my CPAC colleague as in fact it’s primarily descriptive and indeed of a complimentary nature.
Re:
Tuesday, May 10, 2011 4:51 PM
From:
"agmarshall@rogers.com"
Add sender to Contacts
To:
rcampbell@acuteservices.com, lchare@golden.net, lgr@epix.net, v848@yahoo.com, jaherteis@woolwich.com
Thank you Dan and I would be pleased to be offerred the opportunity to make a presentation to CPAC. Alan
--- On Tue, 5/10/11, Dr Dan
From: Dr Dan
Subject: Re:
To: "Lynn Hare"
Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2011, 4:40 PM
Alan,
While I think that the timing of your presentation tonight at the Council meeting is not the best, I support your right to express your opinion. As a famous American once said..."I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" or words to that effect. Your position tonight won't be a "minority" position since we as a committee have not voted on or taken a position on anything...which I am sure is part of what you are discussing tonight. I agree with you that this year presents a favorable "alignment of the stars" regarding getting something done with the only leverage we seem to have. I do wish that you were able to hold off on the public stance for a little bit, but I do understand.
As I sat in the meeting yesterday listening to David B and everyone else state that they really don't know what has taken place due to the way CPAC was handled in the years prior to our appointments it struck me that we have a valuable resource, you, who can give us that history and bring all of us up to speed. You are the only one capable of providing the rest of the committee and township staff with information on the thinking that went in to the Request for Action of 2003 and, using that as an outline, make an orientation presentation to all of us. I would highly recommend to my fellow committee members and the township staff that we have a workshop dedicated to listening to your presentation so that we can be better prepared for the next four (3.5) years. It seems to me that we, as a team, need all the available resources and information that we can access. We are having an orientation from Chemtura, Ministry of Environment, and David Marks to cover their take on the problems why not a historical orientation? Seems we'll be missing a huge amount of relevant data if we don't take advantage of all resources.
Thanks
Dan
No comments:
Post a Comment