Clarington Report Card

"Single issue proving divisive for Clarington Council"

The Metroland Report Card evaluation has been published for our Clarington Council, and while it hits pretty close to the heart of the matter, we might have judged some things slightly differently.

" This year’s grade: C "
" Last year’s grade: B+"

" Clarington council has gone from one extreme to another since its last report card came out one year ago."

"In 2006 we were looking at a slate of seasoned councillors led by a multiple-term mayor who ran the municipality very smoothly but with an iron fist. They had a plan and acted as a cohesive group."

Not sure they were actually so much a cohesive group as a group ruled by a mayor who truly ruled with an iron fist. There was little or no debate about anything. What the mayor said was what was done, period. It appeared that he ruled with TOO MUCH of an iron fist, and that is also not good for the municipality nor for staff or council or residents. Residents were also ruled by an iron fist, many times with intimidation and rudeness. That is not really a good scenario for anyone.

"But the election last year changed the makeup of council and brought new views to the table. Not only do we have three new councillors but also a new mayor in Jim Abernethy."

"While this new crew provides fresh perspective at council meetings they also bring with them a big learning curve. We expected a few hiccups but also for the mayor and each new councillor to do everything they could to learn the job and represent constituents in a fair and reasonable way. So far they’ve done just that."

We agree that the new councillors have done their best to represent their constituents in a fair and reasonable way, but cannot quite say the same for the Mayor with his flip-flops from campaign promises and his unreasonable "landfill or incineration" stance. There are other choices and he won't consider looking at any of them. He also won't accept that incineration does not eliminate landfill, it just puts different materials (ash) into the landfills, including toxic ash that must be shipped to a special facility as it is hazardous waste. We feel the Mayor has not yet realized that he should be representing the PEOPLE, not just the region.

"However, the hiccups that have occurred have been hard to ignore."

"Mayor Abernethy’s absence at the first session of the GTA Mayors and Chairs was unbelievable. Here was a first-time mayor who had zero council experience before being elected. His absence was noticed throughout Durham Region."

It was certainly noticed by residents as well. A very bad start.

"But give the mayor his due, he has settled into the job in recent months and has gained focus. His timing couldn’t have been better because one of the biggest issues ever to hit the municipality has reared its ugly head -- the proposed EFW facility or incinerator as many residents put it."

He certainly has gained focus, but the focus seems to be on incineration and on doing the region's bidding, to the exclusion of most everything else. He appears to have become closed-minded on anything connected to the region, in favour of the region and not of Clarington. While the Statesman gave the Mayor a B-, we would give him a C at best, for now.

"This is one of the issues that requires strong leadership from the mayor because it’s clearly dividing councillors into two camps -- regional versus local."

Strong leadership yes. Tunnel vision, no.

"How else can you explain local councillors Gord Robinson, Willie Woo, Ron Hooper and Adrian Foster’s refusal to allow Regional Chairman Roger Anderson to speak at a recent council meeting regarding EFW?"

The local councillors are listening to the people. The regional councillors (Abernethy, Trim and Novak) are not. They are gung-ho on the region, the region's vision, the region's everything, and are forgetting about what is best for Clarington. The region is NOT always right (remember the greenbelt?).

"They claim it was meant to send a message to Regional council but the message was lost in translation."

We don't think anything was lost in translation. The regional councillors are treating the local councillors like they aren't important, like they shouldn't have any say in things that occur at the regional level, that the regional councillors are above the local councillors in importance, knowledge, and everything that matters. They don't even bother to let the locals know what is going on at the region, and they make motions and resolutions in the name of Clarington without even having them first approved at Clarington Council level. That is just plain WRONG. And we all know that there was no new information for council forthcoming from Chairman Anderson beyond what was already known (the short-list of sites). He was there for one reason only - to send a "message" to the local councillors that they would be allowed $200,000.00 for any peer review studies and no blank cheque. That they would do what the region told them to do and nothing more. That they are at the mercy of Regional Council.

We feel that the local councillors had every right to bully the bullier right back. It was not an easy thing for them to do as very few ever stand up to our unelected regional chair. We must give them credit for doing so, and for trying their best to get the money needed for Clarington to have an independent peer review done of the region's consultant's work, which is badly needed. The region still wants to tell Clarington which studies they can do and which are important or not important to Clarington. We believe Clarington (and Clarington Staff) are in a much better position to decide what is best for Clarington than Durham Region is. We would give all four Local Councillors a B to B+. They need more information to do their jobs, and they are trying their best to get it, with no help from the Mayor or 2 Regional Councillors. We would certainly not deduct any marks for their "message" that was sent not only to Chairman Anderson, but also to their colleagues, Abernethy, Trim and Novak.

"This is an issue council must be united on and stifling debate indicates this is a fractured group. It’s imperative that Mayor Abernethy and Regional councillors Charlie Trim and Mary Novak try to find some common ground with their colleagues before this debate scars council for good."

The local Councillors didn't stifle any debate. There is plenty of debate on this issue. Chairman Anderson was not present for "debate". He was there to send his "strong message" as he stated at an earlier Regional Committee meeting. We've been told by reliable sources he made his intentions very clear at that meeting. It is the Regional Works Chair (Trim) and Mayor Abernethy who seem to want to stifle the debate, reducing it to the false choice of "landfill or incineration" again and again.

It is imperative that the Mayor and two regional councillors start treating their colleagues at Clarington Council as equals, making sure they have all the information from the region that affects Clarington. It is imperative that they become a bit humble, and realize they are ALL paid by the residents of Clarington, and that includes Chair Anderson. They work for us and they should listen to us. They need to be reminded every now and then it seems. They do not seem to realize how this all looks to residents who see them leaving out the residents as well as the Local Councillors at every turn. We would give Novak a C for a grade so far this term, with Trim receiving a C- for his short fuse and kowtowing to Regional interests over Clarington interests.

"For his part Regional Chairman Roger Anderson has attempted to be as helpful as he can when it comes to EFW."

We disagree with this statement. Regional Chairman Roger Anderson has attempted to drive the process to conform with his personal "vision" and preferences. He refuses to listen to the concerns of residents and continues to try to denigrate them when they have the audacity to speak up as delegations to voice their concerns. This unelected Chair drives Regional Council, not the other way around. One more excellent reason to reconsider direct election of the chair by the residents of Durham. He doesn't feel he needs to be accountable to us as we don't have the opportunity to vote for him. He doesn't care what we think, only those at the regional level who can continue to appoint him to the top job in the region.

"There have been numerous public meetings on the issue and he’s been an active participant in most, if not all of the discussions on this technology."

Oh yes, a far too active participant in his efforts to stifle any opposition to his "vision", while trying to appear that he is listening to residents. The EA process demands the public information sessions that are being held. It is not at the request of the Chairman. He has no choice in the matter. He attends some (not all) of the meetings as they are an opportunity to put his spin on the subject.

"In turn, regional councillors have been supportive of the chairman in the knowledge that you have to show respect to receive it in return."

Respect? That's not respect...

We hope things change in the coming months and years. The split is a problem for Clarington but we lay the blame squarely at the feet of the Regional Councillors (Abernethy, Trim and Novak) with their behaviour toward both the Local Councillors, Staff (not supporting their request for necessary independent studies that were larger in scope than the region wanted) and residents (asking them banal questions in an attempt to discredit their viewpoints).

To her credit, Novak has not declared her undying support for incineration for Clarington, but her actions at Regional Council do show that she is supportive of the Regional Chair's "vision", or so it appears. Again, she does not want to listen to residents and makes it clear when she walks out of meetings when locals are presenting as delegations, as does Mayor Abernethy. We have come to expect such rude behaviour from some of the Regional Councillors such as Councillor Johnson for example, but not from our own Clarington representatives.

Something has got to change, but the blame cannot be laid at the feet of our Local Councillors who seem to be at least trying to do their best for our municipality with poor treatment and lack of information from our 3 regional representatives.

We look forward to an awakening by those three and an effort to work together for the benefit of Clarington rather than only the region in the future. Is it conceivable that over the summer recess they may come back with a renewed vision for Clarington and an ability to work with, rather than 'above' our Local Representatives?