BIG mistake - No public meeting allowed

At the Monday morning (March 5) GP&A meeting of Clarington Councillors, 3 delegations requested that a public meeting be held so that Clarington residents might have the opportunity to give their input on direct election of the Durham Region Chair - an opportunity they were denied at election time when previous council refused to include the question on the ballot. Residents of Oshawa, Ajax and Pickering had a referendum question included on the election ballot last fall.

On February 14th, our 3 representatives on Regional Council (Novak, Trim and Abernethy) all voted against endorsing Bill 172 (for direct election of regional chair), even though that motion to endorse did pass, so they lost their bid on that day.

So on February 19, at the GP&A meeting of council, a motion was made by Councillor Foster to "vehemently oppose" Bill 172, and all our councillors except Woo and Hooper agreed. The motion passed. It was also asked that this declaration be sent forthwith to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, rather than even waiting another week for ratification at Council. That passed too, so it was sent right away. The following week, on February 26, Council ratified that original vote, again with only Woo and Hooper wanting to let the public have their say before taking an official Clarington position on it.

On March 5th, at the next GP& A meeting (General Purpose and Administration), 3 delegations stood up to request that a public meeting be held so that Clarington residents could have their opinions heard by council. Once again Council voted to disregard any public input, and again deny the residents of Clarington the opportunity to even speak to the issue. This time though, after listening to the 3 delegations, Councillor Robinson made a motion to hold a public meeting to hear public input on the issue. He said that he may not change his mind, but that at least the public deserves a chance to have their say on direct election of regional chair. The vote resulted in a tie - Robinson, Woo, Hooper in favour of allowing the public meeting, and not surprisingly, Foster, Novak and Trim voting against. It was up to the Mayor to break the tie, and he made a huge mistake. He voted to not allow any public input on the matter. In speaking with someone present at this debacle, I was told the Mayor started to give his reasons for his vote and Councillor Foster shut him down, as he had done with Councillor Woo earlier. There was no more discussion on the issue. Who is running the show, anyway?

There WILL be more discussion on this issue though, as those wanting a public meeting will not give up. It was surprising and extremely disappointing that this council doesn't care to hear any public input on such a major governance issue. These 3 delegations were not asking that they rescind their original motion. They were only asking for a belated opportunity for the public to give their input. Only after hearing all sides to this issue, and hearing from the public (who this council was elected to serve), should council make a decision of this magnitude. Indeed, only after public input can council make an informed decision. But is all it's wisdom, this council and mayor decided they don't need public input for they know better than we do. They are all-knowing and are impatient with these less intelligent beings who elected them, who want to be heard. Of course, since they were elected, some of these people suddenly have become omnipotent beings, above us all.

Thank you to Councillor Robinson for at least believing now that the public should be allowed to be heard. Thank you to Councillors Woo and Hooper for trying to do the right thing, and for listening to the people and believing the public has a right to be heard.

Shame on the disgraceful behaviour of Foster (for leading the charge), Novak, Trim and Abernethy for the indifference they are showing to the opinions or requests of residents and even contempt for our input on a governance issue, where we have every right to speak.

They should consider that we, the voting public, are good enough to give them our votes and to choose a council and mayor, but it seems we couldn't be trusted to choose the person who heads the region? Should we begin to lobby to change the Municipal Act so that we elect a council, and then those 6 people choose a mayor for us - someone unelected at all? Do they really think that would be better than an open election for top spot in the municipality? Perhaps this bunch would think so, as then they could put in one of their old friends, or someone booted out by voters in the last election. The range of possibilities would be endless. This is what happens at the regional level. 28 elected councillors choose the head of the region. What is so different?

The public should be allowed to choose regional chair, and there are many more reasons for a direct, open election of the chair. This includes the nomination process for one, which absolutely favours the incumbent, or at the very least a present member of regional council. Remember that the chair is chosen at the first meeting of regional council after an election, where those 28 who were just elected/re-elected will do the choosing. That doesn't give much time at all for "outsiders" to get nominated (must be by a regional councillor) or to lobby those special 28 for election. How fair is that?

Yes, we do have a democratic deficit in Clarington. And it is increasing. Shame on this Mayor for giving up the chance to make things right by allowing a public meeting. Shame on Foster, Novak and Trim for not wanting to listen to the public who elected them.

Whether you agree with direct election of the chair or not, we should all be very concerned about the lack of interest shown by this council for public input on a huge issue that affects us all. Not just lack of interest, but absolute denial of the democratic process. What are they so afraid of? That someone may make a lot of sense and make them look mentally deficient for taking such a stand against democratic procedure? Sorry to inform them, but that has already happened. And it is only escalating. They can try to cover it by saying they want input on this or that, but we have already seen their behaviour when they have a political issue that benefits them (or they think it does) and do not want anyone to spoil their little party.

Benefit of the doubt for a rookie mayor and partial rookie council? I don't think so. It is the rookie councillors (Woo and Hooper) who have shown the most sense throughout. And Robinson at least trying to give residents a chance to have a say has been a little bit redeemed. But the rest are digging themselves deeper and deeper and deeper...

So, in the end, No public meeting for Clarington residents, thanks to Abernethy, Foster, Novak and Trim.

If you want to have your say, sign up to speak to Council as a delegation, write a letter, and/or comment here on this blog. Some of them surely know about this blog and may take the time to read some of your opinions here too. Or they may not bother. Best to give a deputation at Council or GP&A so they at least have to sit there, whether they listen or not. With a couple of them, that is debatable. We are asking only for a publicized public meeting for the public. Is that such a difficult thing for them to grant? Apparently so!!!