2010 Election not that far away - Abernethy the first target

People are already gearing up for the 2010 municipal elections, even though they are a little over a year away. But it is not too soon to begin planning to oust certain municipal politicians who very blatantly gave the one-finger salute to their residents during the last couple of years. Residents have every right to target those who refused to listen to overwhelming opposition to the incinerator, especially when so many tried to make their voices heard.

Silly me. I always thought that we elected our municipal council and mayor to represent us and to do what is best for the residents of Clarington. What happened? Do they not know that WE are their bosses? Have they become so big-headed that they don't need to listen to those who elected them? Do they honestly believe that they know better than 80% of the residents of Clarington? Do they really believe that the Region's propaganda was any more honest than the biased and misleading studies done by their paid consultants?

Those consultants were hired for one reason. They were hired to see the EA process through to a favourable conclusion (favourable to the already decided end result of the Region to make incineration the option of "choice"). Numerous times residents were told publicly that the Region had decided on this course of action in 2000, with their 20 year waste management plan. Of course that plan only mentioned that burning garbage should be looked into. It did not say that this was the course that should be taken.

Too many of our myopic councillors either can't read and comprehend or they intentionally twisted that plan to mean exactly what they wanted it to mean. The writing was on the wall (and in the direction given to the consultants) before the EA even began.

The writing is now on the wall for several councillors and a handful of Mayors of Durham municipalities. But none more so than Clarington, which harbours 4 who need to be replaced.

The Mayor of Clarington, with his sometimes incomprehensible mutterings needs to be soundly punished and relegated to the trash heap. He was not able to fool all his residents with such gems as his declaration in explaining his "No Waste by '38" motion which he made a point of making clear "didn't mention incineration or landfill". The reason for that? "Neither of these two options is acceptable to me, but you've got to do something with it," Abernethy stated.

You could have fooled us. The mayor was a huge supporter of incineration from the start, despite his attempts to convince residents that he was looking for the truth (not a very funny joke) and that he hadn't yet made up his mind. Early on he took a trip to Nova Scotia and made a home video of the Halifax Otter Lake landfill. All he was interested in was the seagulls (meaning there was garbage present) and that it didn't look pretty. He made that DVD available to people who made it available to even more residents for their viewing pleasure. Abernethy also promoted an industry made propaganda infomercial for SYSAV - yes, promoting incineration in Europe. He played it for audiences around Clarington, all the while promoting incineration. Yet he had the audacity to continue to tell people he hadn't yet made up his mind. How insulting to the residents of Clarington.

As recently as last month he said neither landfill NOR INCINERATION are acceptable. The way he has promoted incineration for the last 2 1/2 years it is apparent that he believes incineration is not only acceptable, but desirable. The facility will have floors so clean you could eat off them (his comments about the European incinerators) and even more important - no seagulls!

This mayor ran his 2006 campaign on having "an honest and open government". He also said, "The role of council is to manage the assets of the municipality and ensure that there is a democratic process." What exactly does "democratic process" mean to this man?

On his campaign video he also said, "There's a lot of important issues that have to be dealt with, and have to be dealt with uh, fairly, uh, dealt with uh in the best interest of all of the people of the municipality." Is that what he has done? NO.

"I think that what needs to be done is we need to have a look to see what will Clarington look like in 50 years from now." Well, for the next 30 - 35 years at least we will be dumping more pollution into an already dirty air shed where record numbers of children now have asthma, older adults have respiratory problems, and cancers are already on the rise. Now we will be adding to those problems and adding new ones. Does he care? Apparently not.

In 2006 Abernethy said, "Our municipal Council needs a made in Clarington agenda." Does that sound familiar? Like the "Made in Durham garbage solution" he is always promoting (which isn't made in Durham at all)? This incinerator being forced on Clarington residents is most certainly NOT a "made in Clarington agenda". Was this an outright lie, or was he so quickly and easily sucked in by Regional Chair Roger Anderson immediately after he was elected? Enquiring minds want to know! This Mayor betrayed Clarington and put the Region first and foremost, unlike the other mayors in the Region. He said on more than one occasion that he was "elected to represent the Region". Funny, I thought he was elected as Mayor of Clarington to represent Clarington.

He ranted against the "Mutton shell-game experience" - or was that "Mutton-Schell game" - (his words). "Higher taxes, higher salaries, higher mileage charges, and numerous international trips," Abernethy said. So what has changed since 2006? It has only gotten worse. Have we heard an apology to Mutton since then? No, only attacks on his campaign financing by Abernethy's former campaign team, and those charges are ongoing. Was Mutton faultless? Hell no. But was he worse than Abernethy? That is debatable at this point, but I'd say no. At least Mutton didn't give away the (Clarington) store to the Region while he was in office. Would he have, on the incinerator issue? Very possibly he would have supported the incinerator as he did quite a job in facilitating the political acceptance of the incinerator and approval of Covanta as the builder/operator. But we won't know because Abernethy beat him to the punch. At least Mutton surely would have gotten a better deal for Clarington. As it is, there is hardly anything in the Host Community Agreement that wasn't already in the works or owed to Clarington without it. That's another discussion altogether.

Speaking of Mutton, Abernethy said, "I've had enough of their experience. Have you?" I can tell you that I, along with the majority of Clarington residents (according to several recent polls), have had enough of the Abernethy experience. More than enough.

Abernethy in 2006 asked us to vote for change. This is not the change we wanted or anticipated. A Mayor who refuses to listen to the residents unless you are one of his favoured friends, or unless you are someone he considers "important to the community". Anyone who is a plain old resident, a plain old taxpayer isn't important to him and he has shown people that in spades, including not allowing street parties which could foster more community spirit. Including the elderly who have been the first to have services cut. Including those speaking out against the incinerator, who were basically given the Trudeau salute, in so many words. Including those asking for more time to speak or to be allowed more input. He shut people up, made them sit down if he didn't like what they had to say, and even went so far as to throw people out. One of the biggest complaints about former Mayor Mutton was that he was a bully. Abernethy has turned out to be as big a bully. But he hates that word because he threw out a resident for calling his best buddy Roger Anderson a bully. He'd better take a good look in the mirror.

I wonder what half-truths this Mayor will tell us during his 2010 campaign. Or will he give up and run away, knowing he hasn't a chance in hell of being re-elected?

Mary Novak and Charlie Trim deserve the same fate, although the word on the street is the Trim is retiring, allowing local ward 4 councilor Gord Robinson to attempt to move up to Charlie's regional seat. Fat chance, after the betrayal of his constituents and those of the entire municipality. Were it not for Robinson, who has now been given the label "traitor", at least we would have remained an unwilling host, which, in spite of statements to the contrary publicly by Anderson, everyone knew would be the nail in the coffin at the Regional Council vote. And it was. This man deserves to hit the unemployment line next year and there are already groups seriously working toward that end.

There are groups spread across Durham Region already making plans for the 2010 election. They are organizing and are determined. They are looking for strong, ethical and honest candidates who understand what democracy is and who will listen to their residents rather than their political bosses in issues affecting our very lives. There will be some massive campaigns not only in support of good candidates but also against those who need to be replaced.

Those who chose to ignore the will of the people will suffer the consequences in 2010. And they will deserve it. They think 2010 is far enough away that people will forget the insulting behaviour of these councillors and mayors, but the opposition to these people is building, not waning since the June Regional vote. We are not stupid. We will not forget. The damage done to our municipality which now has a very deserved reputation as being the dumping ground for Durham Region is irreparable. And Durham Region's reputation for being the dumping ground for York Region is also building. From Stop the Incinerator to Stop the Stink, we get all the crap from York while York Region gets all the benefits. Is that the sign of a good and effective Durham Regional council or leadership? We think not.

The "Elect the Chair" movement is alive and well, and has now been joined by the "Dump Durham's Democratically Deficient" Mayors and Councillors. The most targeted already of the Mayors is Abernethy, O'Connor, Pearce, Perkins, Shepherd and Ryan. Some (most) of these are very vulnerable. Pearce is probably the least vulnerable, even though Scugog could do so much better. The rest are not at all secure in their seats according to local sources. There are more Councillors already with a bull's eye on their backs. Stay tuned for more in coming days, weeks and months. Mayor Abernethy can be assured that we will "Vote for Change" in 2010.

Big Vote Today, Big Vote in November 2010

Today Councillors in Durham Region will vote on their incinerator folly, and will anger and alienate even further the majority of their constituents.

Mr. Anderson, Regional Chair, stated last week that he could not believe people would work to put Regional Councillors out of office over one item. Well, think again Mr. Chair. This "one item" is the largest expenditure ever in the history of Durham Region. It locks us into a chemical spewing, ash producing, resource destroying incinerator that few people want and many are strongly opposed to, for 25 to 35 years. This "one item" is one which has brought out more people than any other issue since the landfill wars many years ago. This "one item" has made people realize that their Regional Councillors (most of them) could care less what their residents think, what their concerns are, what their better alternative ideas are. This "one item" has been bought and paid for with our health, our Gas Tax money that should be used to improve and increase our public transit, our roads, our quality of life. Instead this "one item" has been pushed through by this council without the benefit of all the information.

Throughout this process the excuse has been used by Councillors that they were simply voting to approve each step so that they could get ALL the information before making a final decision. Well, that excuse won't work anymore. So many large, complex studies and reports have come forward all at once that there is little time for anyone to read through them all, and we KNOW that most Councillors only bother to read the Executive Summary and nothing more, if that. We also know that ALL the studies are not completed and ALL the Peer Reviews are also not complete.

Yet these same Councillors are now voting before all the information is in, so that lame excuse that no one believed anyway, is now so much junk.

I want to tell you, Regional Council, we resent being treated like dunces. I would submit to you that it is not the residents who are unworthy of being listened to, or unworthy of respect. It is you, those who have lied to residents and who continue to do so. Those who refused to listen to the people who voted them into office.

We voted you in, and we can most certainly vote you out. This Watchdog Blog was active during the 2006 campaign, and will be even MORE active during the 2010 campaign. I won't let people forget, and I am not alone. There are many who have vowed to organize to help in each municipality to defeat those who have betrayed us right across this region. There will be qualified candidates running, with support (monetary and door to door legwork) from those who have been snubbed and dismissed by their regional representatives.

You may see more local councillors moving up to run for regional seats as well as new candidates moving in. There are a number of pro-incinerator (from the start) candidates who are already being targeted and things will only get tougher as next year draws closer.

In Clarington, the choices are obvious. Mayor Abernethy, should he choose to run again or run for any other seat whether at the local, provincial or federal level eventually, will run into a brick wall. His reputation has suffered greatly with his obviously unequal treatment of residents, his lack of understanding of the EA process and of his municipal duties (he thinks he represents the Region first, over and above Clarington, unlike the other Mayors in Durham Region). This man has lost all credibility and is known as one of the most "un-green" Mayors in this Region, and with so many ungreen mayors, that's reaching quite the pinnacle.

Mary Novak has done nothing to distinguish herself from Abernethy - they are voting together (as usual) on this incinerator, although using different excuses. No one has believed she was 'on the fence' or hadn't made her decision early-on as Abernethy did. Her continual denials only convinced people more that she would vote to approve this incinerator. Her acceptance of the Host Community Agreement that was basically blackmail and gives Clarington very little of anything shows her incompetence and her bias. She will never convince anyone she is doing what is best for the community, or that the incinerator has been proven "safe". It has not.

Charlie Trim has sold out his community and isn't worthy of his seat. The buzz is that he's not running again and has given his seat to Councillor Robinson next term. Well you can't do that. Charlie's supporters are not sheep and will vote as they please, and from those I've heard from, very few will even consider voting for Robinson after his total betrayal of the entire municipality as it was his vote that accepted the HCA and gave up the unwilling host status. He single-handedly, in one fell swoop, destroyed any future he may have had in Clarington politics. Or maybe he's been promised an appointment by Roger Anderson. Whatever the reason, no one has any respect for the man any longer. It was a total and blatant betrayal, and one that won't be forgotten. I hope he believes it was worth it.

I hope a lot of residents show up at today's meeting and aren't so discouraged that they give up. There is still much work to do, right through next year's election. I will take bets on how much larger a voter turnout there will be next year, and how many seats we can put new faces into. I do know of 4 seats in Clarington that MUST be cleaned out and re-filled. We won't forget.

Yes I may be a little premature, but I can't seen any of them changing their votes today. I've even heard that at least one municipality won't receive emails from their own constituents, and openly won't listen to them. Why Would We Wish to keep elected officials like that around?

To the good Councillors who have done the real research and have had a very open dialogue with residents, I commend you. To those of you who have listened only to one side of the story and who have betrayed your own residents, I say you deserve what you get next year, which will be a spot in the unemployment line.

And to Mr. Anderson, we will work diligently to make sure that the Durham Regional Chair is elected and accountable to the people.

Mutton acquitted due to "reasonable doubt"

Feb 26, 2007 - Ex-mayor Mutton acquitted of assault charges - Metroland

The Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that what occurred during a "rage fueled by excessive alcohol consumption" amounted to assault against Mr. Mutton's wife Jennifer and 10-year-old daughter Katie, said Justice J.J. Keaney in delivering his verdict.

More on acquittal:
Feb 27, 2007 - Ex-mayor doesn't rule out return to politics - Metroland

Asked how much impact the charges had in his loss, he was unequivocal.
"They were the total impact of the election loss," he said.

Feb 27, 2007 - Black cloud lifts on Mutton - Toronto Sun
Feb 27, 2007 - Ex-mayor not guilty of hitting wife, child - Toronto Star

Visit "The Mutton Trial" for a full recap of articles written on the trial.

The Mutton Trial

With so many people writing and asking about the trial of our former Mayor, I decided I will provide links to newspaper articles so they can follow the progress since the trial has begun. It is of interest to Clarington residents as Mr. Mutton was our Mayor for 2 terms and on council prior to that for a term. No one knows whether he will run for office again in the future, and the outcome of this trial may be a deciding factor. There was much pre-trial speculation, and now much interest in the trial itself.

Jan 30, 2007 - Former Clarington mayor's trial going longer than expected - Metroland
Jan 30, 2007 - Daughter wavers on alleged assault - Toronto Star
Jan 31, 2007 - Former mayor's wife takes the stand - Metroland
Feb 1, 2007 - Crown says fear makes ex-mayor's daughter change story - Metroland
Feb 15, 2007 - Ex-mayor claims to have 'blacked out' - Metroland
Feb 16, 2007 - `If she says I kicked her, I kicked her' - Toronto Star
Feb 16, 2007 - 'I've ruined my family' - Toronto Sun
Feb 26, 2007 - Ex-mayor Mutton acquitted of assault charges - Metroland
Feb 27, 2007 - Ex-mayor doesn't rule out return to politics - Metroland
Feb 27, 2007 - Black cloud lifts on Mutton - Toronto Sun
Feb 27, 2007 - Ex-mayor not guilty of hitting wife, child - Toronto Star

The trial was originally set for 2 days, January 29 and 31, but two additional trial days, Feb. 15 and 26, were set aside due to the amount of testimony expected.
Keaney reserved judgment until Feb. 26.

Candidates and Issues

Jennifer Stone (Metroland newspapers & durhamregion.com) gives an overview of issues the 5 candidates for Mayor feel are most important to them and/or to the residents of Clarington in her Oct. 3rd article "Mayoral candidates speak to the issues". It's important to know the issues facing Clarington residents and to figure out what the candidates will do about them, so we hope you will take the time to read her article and to ask questions of the candidates. And not only those running for Mayor, but those running for ANY council seat.

It's no surprise that taxes, growth and accountability are the top issues. Taxes are always an issue, and especially when they have been steadily rising over the last few years - at a faster and higher rate than many feel is really necessary. Taxes will always be a sore spot with most residents, but especially when they face the large increases in property tax that some are facing this year.

Growth is always a hot topic for politicians - most of whom seem to feel that the more the better. The faster the better. The bigger the better. In a rural municipality like Clarington, where many have come to escape the "city life", traffic congestion, noise, pollution, etc., seeing what appears to be a developer-friendly council who can't wait to pave over paradise makes us crazy. Intensification within urban boundaries has to occur, but should be done in stages and in a way that will keep our communities user-friendly and safe. Expanding urban boundaries to accommodate the developers without a "need" for more space for development is something that has been done in the past and should be mitigated, and something that should not be allowed to happen in the future. Keeping infrastructure and services in step with development does not mean keeping artificially low development charges or waiving them altogether for certain developments. Clarington is a very desirable place to build, and we feel that there is no reason to keep development charges low to attract developers! As infrastructure ages, it is the residents who must pay for upkeep and replacement through their taxes. The same goes for all the recreation facilities within our communities. Yes, we need them especially for the youth in Clarington. But what about the Total Hockey Museum? Couldn't that money have been possibly better spent on a skateboard facility for Orono, for example? The lack of consultation with the public on some of these things makes people wonder whether our views even register at anytime other than leading up to an election.

Accountability is very important to us as residents of Clarington and as citizens of Canada. That means our politicians are accountable to us for their decisions. That means we are free to ask questions, criticize decisions made by any level of government, including our municipal council, expect to be treated with respect even when we disagree, and have the freedom to complain when we think huge raises in salary and mileage or taxes are not warranted nor deserved. We have the right to complain if we feel we have not been treated fairly or have been treated rudely. If politicians can't take criticism from constituents, then they should not run for public office nor put themselves in the public eye. If they try to shut down free speech or freedom of expression, they should be held accountable for that. We need an open and accessible municipal government and residents need to feel they can speak up when they have an objection or concern about something, rather than feeling afraid to speak.

Campaign Donors - No 'Developer-free' candidates in 2003

There are no declared 'developer-free' incumbents in this election, and only 3 challengers who are 'developer-free so' far - 2 in the Mayoral race and one in the Wards 3 & 4 Regional seat race.

Please click on images for a larger view.

Clarington Mayoral Candidates:

By far the largest campaign war chest was amassed by John Mutton in 2003, which is not surprising since he was running for the top job as Mayor, even though he was the incumbent an had only one challenger. Of the $40,140.00 in campaign contributions, he raised only $344 from single contributors who donated $100 or less. You will see on the list of contributors developers and corporations who put forward applications that the Mayor (and Council) were then asked to approve over the last 3 years. He certainly has the support of developers. Rarely is there debate from other Councillors over applications the Mayor supports. Much has been said about the lack of opposition or debate on anything the Mayor supports over the last several years. Why?

Next is Jim Schell, who was Regional Councillor for Wards 1 & 2 in 2003, and in 2006 is running for Mayor. Jim had no contributions of $100 or less. Jim's total contributions received were $1375.00. However, since Mr. Schell was acclaimed in 2003, he didn't need to run a full campaign or raise money to do so.

So far there are 2 declared 'developer-free' candidates for Mayor in this election - Jim Abernethy and Richard Ward.

Clarington Regional Candidates:
Charlie Trim is next. Charlie was/is Regional Councillor for Wards 3 and 4 and is running for that same seat in this election. From individual donors who contributed $100 or less, Mr. Trim received $70.00. Total contributions to Mr. Trim were $4920.00.

Linda Gasser is a "corporate-free candidate" running for the Regional Wards 3 & 4 seat and is accepting campaign contributions from individuals only.

The next incumbent is Don MacArthur, who is presently local Ward 2 Councillor, but will be running for Jim Schell's vacated Wards 1 & 2 Regional seat. From individual donors who contributed $100 or less, Mr. MacArthur received $50.00. Mr. MacArthur's total contributions amounted to $2875.00.

We'll cover the last 3 councillors in our next post.

(Source: Clarington Clerk's Dept.)

Development Dollars in Campaigns - Why is it important to us?

Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.
Ronald Reagan - 40th president of US (1911 - 2004)

When you look at the amount of money donated to candidates by those in the development industry, and then at resulting future development decisions, you have to wonder. Especially when you see all the political machinations in trying to give a boost to land speculators or developers who already have bought up cheap farmland in anticipation of being able to change zoning to suit their desire to add yet more money-making (for them) subdivisions to the ever-increasing sprawl.

Knowing who contributes to campaigns and understanding the interests of those contributors may help to explain the candidates views and the directions they take in municipal governance. If those willing to contribute money to candidates are few and share common interests, such as the development industry, and those common interests are not necessarily shared by a wider public, they may be able to influence what candidates come forward, what views those candidates hold and what chances they have for election. If elected, these large contributors appear to hold more influence over the elected than the average citizen. Could this be why average citizens are shouted at, ridiculed, and badgered when speaking in opposition to Council's (Regional or local) position on some of these issues? Our "apparently" pro-development Council has produced urban/suburban sprawl that is automobile dependent, unfriendly to mass transit, lacking density to support other services and dependent on infrastructure outside the boundaries of our smaller municipalities.

Durham Region's choice to proceed with their ill-advised "Option 3", to designate "Future Growth Areas", signaling their intention to allow more sprawl in these areas as soon as allowed to do so, is just such an example of pandering to special interests rather than the public good. Their attempts at removing more lands from the Provincial Greenbelt for future development is another signal. And they are still trying to remove lands but have put it off until after the election (no doubt because of the strong opposition by voters!). Once the election is over, however, they will have 4 years to try to get voters to forget what they're doing. Their own planning staff have told them that there is enough land designated within present urban boundaries to last until 2031 for development, but still this group wants to give a leg up to developers, who really don't need that extra help. It's your average citizen who needs help in trying to control "sprawl".

The importance of the development industry in municipal campaign funding is substantial. The development industry is by far the largest segment of all contributions in Durham Region in general and Clarington specifically. This is not surprising given the political economy of the development industry and the vital role that municipal politics plays in the creation of profit for developers.

How does developer money help certain candidates? That money helps give a candidate publicity and profile. When voters know little about the candidates, those with more election signs, more brochures, more backing may appear to be more credible while those with smaller campaign chests may seem to be "fringe" candidates, representing "fringe" views. Untrue and unfair, especially when it comes to new candidates, but there it is.

We do have some (very few) candidates who are not accepting corporate or developer dollars. Ask them when they knock at your door or you attend an event where candidates are present (both incumbents and new candidates). Hopefully they'll be truthful because that information is available to the public. Speaking of which, through being given that information for the 2003 election campaign, we found that EVERY SINGLE Clarington Candidate in 2003 did accept/receive money from the development industry.

What can we do to change this? Look at the record of incumbents and find out all you can about the challengers. Remember that incumbents have a head start - they already have signs and campaign literature. They have a "base". They have free advertising in the form of speeches at council that are reported in the local newspapers (along with name/face recognition). They have more opportunities to attend functions in an "official" capacity and carry some "clout" (or they think they do). Look at their true record, not the spin that accompanies campaigns in the form of literature and sound bites.

You may want to support 'developer-free' candidates with contributions - financial or time or simply our votes. Ask questions about all the "issues" and make informed decisions. Try to get local groups to host debates and 'meet and greet' type events for all local candidates. Go and meet the candidates and ask a lot of questions. Don't just depend on "name recognition" when you receive your ballot. And be sure to vote after doing your research.

Candidate's feud spotlighted in Star

On the front page of the GTA section of the Toronto Star today, the top story outlines the bickering between Clarington mayoral candidates John Mutton and Jim Schell. They challenge each other's versions of an e-mail sent by Schell to Mutton, allegedly, according to Mayor Mutton, an attempt at vote-splitting in the upcoming election. Seems the two former political allies have had a falling out.

Durham councillor enters mayor's race

Plans to challenge Clarington incumbent instead of retiring
Decision influenced by assault charges against current leader

Aug. 28, 2006

STAN JOSEY
STAFF REPORTER

The mayor's race is heating up in Clarington, where a veteran councillor and long-time ally of two-term mayor John Mutton has entered the contest.

Local and regional councillor Jim Schell, who was planning to retire from politics after the municipal election in November, now says uncertainty caused by criminal charges filed against Mutton in June caused him to rethink his plan.

Mutton, 39, is seeking his second term under a cloud of two charges of assault now before the courts. A publication ban on evidence surrounding the charges has created an air of rumour and innuendo that could affect the outcome of the election, Schell said.

Through his lawyer, Mutton pleaded not guilty to the assault charges last week in an Oshawa courtroom and is scheduled to stand trial in January.

Schell, a 61-year-old retired business executive, said he wants to give voters in Clarington, on Durham Region's eastern border, a candidate they can trust and respect.

"I saw that a lot of inexperienced candidates are running in this election and I feel an experienced hand should be at the helm for the coming term."

Mutton, however, accused Schell of "dirty politics," citing emails from his fellow councillor saying he would only enter the race to help re-elect Mutton.

The mayor has released an Aug. 9 email he received from Schell saying: "Lots of people are pushing me to run. I'm worried about your ability to win. The numbers don't look good. If I run, I'll take votes from Ab (candidate Jim Abernethy), not you. Your votes look solid, but I don't think you have enough at this point. We'll wait and see."

Mutton said Schell appeared to be trying to split any "dump Mutton" vote to allow the mayor to keep his job.

"I don't want to be a part of anyone trying to rig the election for anyone else," Mutton said on the weekend. "I just want people to know where Jim is coming from."

But Schell, who brings the number of mayoral candidates to five, said the email was taken out of context, and he was simply pointing out what could happen in the election.

Schell said he has great respect for the current mayor, but noted that if Mutton is defeated, it should be by someone who has experience on council.

He said he faced pressure from segments of the community to postpone his retirement and spend more time as a lay minister in the Anglican Church. "I'll still do some of that, but I am ready to work full-time as mayor for the next four years."

While Mutton has a strong electoral base in the community, where his family has lived for five generations, Schell is expected to split any anti-Mutton vote with Abernethy, a 54-year-old businessman.

Also in the race for mayor are auto salesman Wayne J. Chaskavich and Richard Ward, who has run for the post before.

While the previous Toronto Star story (August 24, GTA section) had opined "Mutton is not facing a serious challenge for his job so far", it appears someone was worried that one or more of the challengers (Jim Abernethy, Richard Ward or Wayne Chaskavich) IS mounting a serious challenge to Mutton, and I would agree with that second assessment.

However, having Schell in the race now could be a blessing for the other candidates, as it could be more likely that he will draw votes away from Mutton than from Abernethy, since Mutton and Schell have such a long history together, and would likely have the same voter base. As well, those voting "for change" would be more likely to vote for one of the challengers, rather than for the mayor who has served 2 terms or Schell who has been on council even longer.

Political allies turned foes!

Oh my. The race heats up and the excrement hits the fan. The present mayor and the present regional councillor for Wards 1 & 2 will face off against each other in the race for the Mayor's seat.

We really don't have much to say - you can read it for yourselves. See Clarington This Week's front page headline "Political allies turned foes" in the Sunday, Aug 27th edition.

Schell enters mayoralty race

Aug 25, 2006 By Jillian Follert
CLARINGTON -- Longtime Clarington councillor Jim Schell has abandoned plans for retirement and thrown his hat in the ring to run for mayor, saying he wants to provide voters with a viable leadership option.

"It is a crucial time in Clarington's development, which will require strong leadership, commitment and experience to guide it over the next four years," he said in a recent statement announcing his candidacy.

He began his political career in 1997 when elected as local councillor for Ward 2, and was elected in 2000 as regional councillor (Wards 1-2), a position he has held to date.

Mayor John Mutton, who is seeking a third term, said Coun. Schell was a member of his campaign team until just last week, and believes his colleague suddenly decided to run, because he fears strong candidates may prevent the incumbent mayor from regaining his seat.

"He told me he was going to enter the race to take votes away from Jim Abernethy so I can win," Mayor Mutton said. "That isn't democratic. I don't want anyone in the public to think I have any part in vote-splitting or anything undemocratic...this is a decision Jim (Schell) made on his own."

Mayor Mutton said he has e-mails from Coun. Schell confirming these motives.

One such e-mail, written to the mayor from Coun. Schell on Aug. 9 reads, "lots of people are pushing me to run. I'm worried about your ability to win. The numbers don't look good. If I run, I'll take votes from AB (Abernethy) not you. Your votes look solid, but I don't think you have enough at this point."

Coun. Schell was quick to defend his ethics, saying he is running to win.

"I don't know what John's on about," he said. "My motivation for running is quite simply that I have had a lot of people come to me looking for an alternative candidate with some experience."

He added the e-mails have been taken completely out of context, explaining that the Aug. 9 correspondence was written to pacify and reassure Mayor Mutton, after he had asked Coun. Schell not to run against him.

Coun. Schell began his political career as a local councillor for Ward 2 in 1997. Earlier this year, he announced plans to retire from politics, but said events of this summer have changed his mind.

In June, Mayor Mutton was charged with two counts of assault, the details of which are protected by a publication ban. He has pleaded not guilty and will go to trial in January.

The incident has left voters to choose between inexperienced candidates and a mayor facing criminal charges -- a situation Coun. Schell said he had to address by running.

"There are a lot of disappointed people out there and I want to give them an alternative," he said. "There is no hidden agenda here."

According to the clerk's office, Coun. Schell filed to run for mayor on Aug. 24. Also vying for the seat are Jim Abernethy, Richard Ward and Wayne Chaskavich.

So there you have it. Still questions to be answered - whether we'll ever get the straight poop is another matter. Mutton and Schell have different versions but one thing is clear. Something is stinky in this campaign.

We need more than just a good, honest, ethical mayor. We also need the same in all those elected to council, so do your homework and learn all you can about ALL the candidates in this election.

Finally, a plea and court date for Mayor

Yesterday John Mutton was absent from this court date just like he was on the last two dates (July 11, and August 8), so there wasn't a lot to see. But this time his agent entered a not guilty plea for him. Postponement had been granted on the two previous dates with no plea entered. So now the case will proceed to trial on January 29th. Yes, that's right - 2 1/2 months after our municipal elections.

The Mayor was charged with 2 counts of assault in June, but there is a court ban on any further information on the matter. The mayor's agent entered not guilty pleas for both charges. The Mayor has declined to comment on the case so far.

See the Metroland News story about this latest court date.

Money, mileage, trust - some election issues

Opinion piece reprinted from the Orono Weekly Times (August 16, 2006 edition) - some things to consider.

"JUST MY OPINION" by Luke Prout, Kendal

Sara Evans recently released a beautiful song about an ex-lover that ran off with another woman, and now wanted Sara to take him back because he realized that she was what he really wanted all along. To sum the song up, the answer is "NO", with a hard driving chorus that goes "Maybe you should have thought about that when you were cheating".

This should be the theme song for the 2006 Clarington Election. Every single member of the Council has a job that most people in the region would die for. Excellent pay for all positions, work hours are basically at the councillors discretion - with the exception of one 3 hour weekly council meeting there are no required hours of work for local councillors. Expenses including gas and meals are reimbursed, and you're invited to all major events. You're paid extra when you sit on additional committees. Your work can make a difference. You're respected, you're a somebody and well paid for it.

Instead of treating this position with the dignity it deserves, the first thing the council does is to give itself a WHOPPING big pay increase. When Mayor Mutton was first elected in 2000 his job paid $79,000. Now he's paid $164,000 per year, or 207% of what he made when he was originally elected. Who else gets this kind of raise? Then, they give themselves a gas mileage allowance that exceeds any comprehension and change the rules so that now they're not reimbursed for mileage driven, but get a flat rate - they don't have to show they drive at all! They get paid even when they're sick now, and this allowance is big enough to make monthly car payments on a BMW, buy gas, AND buy insurance!

The mayor's automatic monthly gas allowance exceeds $1,200! Just for an idea $1,200 divided by the 47cents per km (or worse) the rest of us get means that the mayor must drive over 2,500 km per month in Clarington, or roughly the distance to Florida. Add trips to Russia and China (with an entourage) at the tax payer's expense. How about a reserved street parking spot for the "Mayor"? Millions are spent on expensive outside consultants. Meanwhile the local taxes have gone through the roof to fund these excesses. Mine are up over a thousand dollars.

On a moral level we have criminal charges against the mayor during this term of office. I wrote some recent letters to the Orono Weekly Times relating to Councillor Robinson's use of farm plates on the same vehicle that he argues he needs for council and gets the huge gas allowance on. No good reply yet. I still have NOT received any facts on the money stolen from the Bowmanville Arena other than "it's under control" (ask your councillor about that - it's a perfect example of council's belief the taxpayer is inherently stupid).

The recent shouting down of Mrs. Racansky in her scheduled ten minutes of presentation to councillors about the tax increase was so ridiculous (and televised) that any councillor in that room that did not lift a hand to stop the mayor's juvenile tirade should have resigned by the end of the week if they had any dignity (none stopped him) Sitting on your hands when the people who elected you are abused; that badly indicates cowardice or ineptitude.

In spite of this, most of the current councillors are singing one of two tunes: The first is my favourite: "Look at my track record". OK. Based on their track record, the Town is heading for serious financial difficulties if we are stupid enough to elect the current crowd. Is it actually possible that the current council thinks 200% raises and these tax increases are normal? The second tune is even stupider: "There have been mistakes - but give us a chance to fix it by re-electing us" Does anyone actually fall for this?

I think "REVENGE" is the right word. You want to be re-elected? NO. Maybe you should have thought about that when you were cheating.

(Permission to reprint from author)

Yet another adjournment for the Mayor

Just like the previous court date of July 11, when John Mutton's lawyer asked that his appearance be postponed to August 8, this time (August 8) his lawyer asked once again for an adjournment, this time until August 22nd. Both times Mayor Mutton was absent from court. He was arrested on June 24th for an offense which took place on June 10th, and was granted bail on June 25th after spending the night in jail.

The story of the arrest has been carried in a number of newspapers, including the Toronto Star.

Mayor's assault case postponed to August 8

Mayor Mutton himself wasn't in court this morning but instead had representation for the very brief appearance in a west Oshawa courtroom. His case was postponed until Tuesday, August 8th. There is still a publication ban on the case so Durham Regional Police and court observers aren't able to give any details.

Cops mum on mayor's charges

See Clarington This Week's article "Clarington Mayor charged with assault".

Also there was a story on page 5 of today's Toronto Sun: Cops mum on mayor's charges

By BRODIE FENLON, TORONTO SUN

Durham Regional Police are refusing to release any information about assault charges laid against the mayor of Clarington, citing concerns about identifying victims.

John Mutton, in his second term as mayor of town council, faces two counts of assault and will appear in an Oshawa court July 11, a local newspaper reported yesterday.

Dave Selby, spokesman for the police service, said the report is accurate but he refused to elaborate.

"That is fact. That is factual. But we never released that," Selby said of the charges.
"We're not revealing or releasing any information with regard to that investigation to be consistent with how we've dealt with cases like this is in the past."

"The main focus is the concern about the identification of victims. That's why we did not release the information."

Mutton, who was in Toronto yesterday, declined to comment on the charges.

His page on the town's website says that he is a fifth-generation resident of the area and lives in Newcastle Village area with his wife, Jennifer, and their two children.

Durham Regional Chairman Roger Anderson, who sits on the police services board, also declined comment yesterday. "It's before the courts and I'm sure the courts will deal with it appropriately, as will Mayor Mutton," Anderson said.

Who is Running in November?

Nominations for any of the positions below are open until September 29, 2006, so there is still plenty of time for people to declare. I'll update this list periodically, but the group of interested candidates is growing.
Updated October 14, 2006

Also check the May 29th Orono Times editorial "We deserve better" for more background on the race.

Office of Mayor (5 candidates)
John Mutton

Jim Abernethy jimabernethy@hotmail.com
http://www.jimabernethy.ca/
(B) 905-983-8270

Richard Ward richardward2006@gmail.com
(T) 905-983-6213

Wayne J. Chaskavich
(T) 905-436-2166

Jim Schell hjamesschell@hotmail.com
http://www.jimschellformayor.net/
(T) 905-623-5573

Regional Councillor Wards 1 & 2 (5 candidates)
Don MacArthur don.macarthur@sympatico.ca
(H) 905-623-3274 (B) 905-260-0818

George Van Dyk gvandyk@durham.net
http://www.georgevandyk.com/
(H)905-623-9615 (F) 905-623-0554

Kevin McAlpine mcalpinecampaign@hotmail.com
(B)905-439-5432

Wotten, Arnot
(T) 905-263-2512 (F) 905-263-9940

Mary Novak mnovak1@sympatico.ca
(T) 905-436-2583

Regional Councillor Wards 3 & 4 (3 candidates)
Charlie Trim
(H) 905-786-2403

John Buddo info@johnbuddo.com
http://www.johnbuddo.com
(T) 905-786-9886

Linda Gasser lagasser@netrover.com
http://www.lindagasser.com/
(H) 905-983-5249 (F) 905-983-5825


Local Councillor Ward 1 (2 candidates)
Adrian Foster adrianfoster@sympatico.ca
http://www.adrianfoster.ca/
(H) 905-404-8613

Oudit Rai
(T) 905-436-2029 (H) 905-432-9174



Local Councillor Ward 2 (8 candidates)
Blair Smyth blairsmyth307@hotmail.com
(H)905-697-9299

Colin Argyle socks.argyle@sympatico.ca or cargyle@ofl.ca
(H)905-623-8270 (B)416-443-7682

Steve Rowland dsrowland@gmail.com
http://electsteverowland.blogspot.com
(H)905-623-1803

Ron Hooper ron.hooper@sympatico.ca
(T)905-623-3097 (F)905-623-5303

John Sturdy
(T) 905-623-2435

Terry Lynch Mr.terrylynch@hotmail.com
(T)905-697-8638

Mike Slocombe vote_mike.slocombe@yahoo.ca
(T) 905-623-4278

Philip Carlton vli@sympatico.ca
(T) 905-623-7877 (F) 905-623-7177

Local Councillor Ward 3 (4 candidates)
Kevin Anyan kevin@kingscourtcatering.com
(H)905-623-4277(F)905-623-2198

Willie Woo willie.woo@rogers.com
(T)905-987-3388

Kyrke Innis kyrke@sympatico.ca
(H) 905-697-3409

Lou DeVuono lou.devuono@rockyside.com
(T) 905-448-9967

Local Councillor Ward 4 (3 candidates)
Gord Robinson
(T) 905-786-2970

Paul Jones jonesfamily@porchlight.ca
(T) 905-983-5857

Wendy Partner loveabounds@msn.com
http://www.wendypartner.ca/
(T) 905-983-9238

***************************

Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board (4 candidates)
Cathy Abraham cathy_abraham@kprdsb.ca
(H) 905-987-1833

Todd Shrigley tashrigley@sympatico.ca
(T) 905-263-4440

Steven Cooke stcooke@mail.com
(T) 905-623-8306

Karen Hills karenhills56@hotmail.com

Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board (4 candidates)
Granville Anderson granville.anderson@wst.gov.on.ca
(T) 905-436-3905 (F) 416-326-5164

Maureen Day day4trustee@look.ca
(T) 905-263-1083

Barbara Malone tbmtm@sympatico.ca
(T) 905-786-2444

Andrew W. Bennion bennion@rogers.com
(T) 905-259-7015 (F) 905-556-0433

Conseil Scolaire De District Catholique Centre-Sud (1 candidate)
Adrien Lamoureux alamoureux@csdccs.edu.on.ca
(T) 613-398-0721 (W) 613-398-3201

Conseil Scolaire De District Public Centre-Sud-Ouest (1 candidate)
Sylvie Landry
(T) 905-837-0663

Total Hockey or White Elephant?

A 2 million dollar hockey museum, to be named "Total Hockey" is currently being built at the Garnet Rickard Recreational Centre which will feature the 1300 piece Brian McFarlane hockey memorabilia collection. Brian McFarlane is the creator of Peter Puck and son of Leslie McFarlane, also known as Franklin W. Dixon of Hardy Boys fame. Many citizens see the museum as a white elephant for the current mayor and council.

The "Total Hockey" facility is scheduled to open right around the same time as our municipal elections this fall. What a coincidence. And for the $2 million pricetag, Total Hockey needs to score. But who will end up paying the bill in the end? Why, the taxpayers, of course. And some valid questions have been asked with no answers so far... The Brian McFarlane 1,300-piece collection was purchased from the Big Apple restaurant at Colborne on Hwy. 401. Why would they sell it if it was such a money-maker? Were there not enough visitors? What was the revenue? Once people have seen the 1300 piece (undocumented) collection, will they keep coming back over and over again? And why not just go a little bit west to Toronto to the Hockey Hall of Fame for the real Total Hockey Experience?

What is the ongoing overhead going to cost us? And could that money have been put toward something more practical, like keeping our property tax rate a bit more reasonable? We're sure there will be plenty of nifty photo-ops for the Mayor and incumbent councillors especially when Total Hockey nears completion or has it's grand opening at election time.

"To me, this is the ideal spot for Total Hockey, because of the enthusiasm generated by the mayor and council for the project, and because of the growth of the community and the need for tourism attractions," he said. "That's what really sold me on coming here."

Mr. McFarlane said he had been approached by other places, interested in his collection, "but an hour spent in the mayor's office sold me on coming here."

Once here, the collection may even grow in value, suggested Mr. McFarlane, who said in his experience, people who have visited the collection have come back to donate pieces.

"There are people out there who will be very willing to contribute," he said, telling of one man, who visited the collection, returning a few weeks later with a stick used by Red Wings goalie Terry Sawchuk.

Total Hockey will be a "tourism anchor" for Clarington, said Mayor John Mutton.

A tourism anchor? Gosh, I have an old Sher-Wood goalie stick that might have been used by Bernie Parent that I could donate. And a puck signed by Jean Beliveau. Of course I can't prove it but then again how many of the 1300 pieces are documented?

Well, I do hope Total Hockey scores big. I think it already has by being purchased by Clarington! Maybe I'm a pessimist and maybe this will be a huge tourism attraction. I have my doubts along with a lot of other people, including hockey fans.

Mayor says BIA can't win

Clarington's mayor Mutton doesn't think Bowmanville's BIA should appeal the council's approval of applications by developers to build big box stores at the west end of town. Bowmanville BIA and Zellers have teamed up to launch an appeal against the 700,000 square feet of new retail space that was approved all at once in an area that they feel can't really support it, without severely affecting the downtown area. It's not that they want to stop all commercial retail development. It's just that it's too much too quickly.

Under Clarington's official plan, population increases would trigger expansion in how much retail floor space can be opened. That is/was a safeguard to maintain downtowns as strong commercial areas.

Downtown Bowmanville merchants are "in support of a number of the proposals in the King Street-Hwy. 2 corridor when population thresholds are met," said Ron Hooper of the Bowmanville BIA. But the group is "opposed to any commercial development that is not within this corridor ... The history of the impact of malls on the peripheral (area of a municipality) is well documented - one succeeds at the expense of another."

Mr. Hooper (the Chairman of the Board of Management for Historical Downtown Bowmanville) noted that there will be historic consequences for the downtown core should these applications be allowed to proceed. He noted that when the population is large enough to support all the businesses then he would welcome the introduction of the applications. He stated that people who work outside the area will continue to shop outside the area and that downtown Bowmanville will not be able to survive the incline in sales.

But our Mayor doesn't want the Bowmanville business group and Zellers to appeal, because the BIA will lose $400,000.00 that the municipality "negotiated" for them from the developers. But that money is contingent on there being no appeal of the approval to the OMB. Hmmm. Sure, it's nice to have some money "donated" toward promotions, events, infrastructure, etc. for the BIA, but come on! To make it contingent on there not being an appeal? Obviously it's not illegal, but it sure does look funny.

And where does the Mayor get off telling everyone that the BIA/Zellers appeal doesn't have a hope in hell of succeeding? Stan Stein (Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt) appeared before Council on behalf of his client, Zellers Inc. Mr. Stein advised Council of the history of the planning process involving the Ontario Municipal Board and noted that the decisions of the OMB hearing are being abandoned. According to the notice of appeal, the basis for concern is that a 1990s Ontario Municipal Board decision tied new retail growth to population growth, but that the new approvals don't follow that principle. Whether they win or not, that doesn't sound like an appeal without merit.

Now I like to shop as much as the next person, and yes I sometimes shop at Wal-Mart or Home Depot in Oshawa. I am not automatically against all big box stores. But it depends on location and timing. And fairness to other business owners as well as residents. The location of this proposed development is a concern for many. Even the planning department was not in favor of approval of the Home Depot in that location but eventually it got approved along with the Wal-Mart and Loblaws. There are traffic and other concerns due to location (residential and schools) that people feel have not been adequately addressed.

What is important is that commercial policy must strike a balance. There's room for both, for the specialty shops downtown and the big box stores on the edges of town. And that is what the Bowmanville BIA has been saying all along. That makes sense. Of course it can be hard for downtown areas to compete as parking is harder to find, it's not as convenient, and it's hard for small, family business to remain competitive in a small town with large, multinational corporations nipping at your heels. But if there are no big box stores for residents, it can be argued that they leave town to shop and the downtown businesses miss out on that group too. So having both in a community can be a good thing. But approving too much new retail space all at once can become a problem. We do know that council loves growth. Growth is good, and the more the better. That means more tax dollars for them to spend. But they don't always look at the other costs of that growth, both in dollars and cents, and in community problems, traffic, crime, need for more soft services, etc.

So, whether you're for or against the big box stores, there is still the question of whether the mayor should be predicting the outcome of an OMB hearing in advance. Or slagging Zellers, who have been a good corporate customer for the municipality. Or trying to use hush money to stop the Bowmanville BIA from proceeding with an appeal they feel they have every right to proceed with. Or ignoring Clarington's official plan, where population increases would trigger expansion in how much retail floor space can be opened. Or ignoring a 1990s Ontario Municipal Board decision that tied new retail growth to population growth. I would say NO.

Developers have long had tremendous power to get their way in Clarington, from residential developments in sensitive areas to this type of pressure for commercial development. Yes we need commercial development in Clarington. But we have to be careful of where and when and do what is truly best for the community, not just for the municipal pocketbook.

Council's Mileage Rate Increase

Last summer Clarington Council more than doubled their mileage allowances. The new flat rate ncreased the mayor's mileage allowance from $570 a month to $1,293. The councillor who is appointed deputy mayor will now receive $823 a month, up from $278, while all other councillors' mileage rates jump from $228 to $564. The new rate is meant to mirror the mileage rate for municipal staff, who receive 47 cents per kilometre. However, unlike municipal politicians, staff do not receive a flat rate for mileage. They have to keep track of mileage, but that seems to be too difficult for our politicians to do!

Collecting on a per-kilometre basis would be a complicated procedure for councillors who make numerous trips a day, said Regional Councillor Jim Schell.

"The concern was that, from a council perspective, it's extremely onerous to keep track of mileage for individual trips," said Coun. Schell, noting he makes five to six trips of various distances a day on council business.

"What would happen," surmised the councillor, "is that councillors would say, 'You know what? I won't worry about those (shorter trips). I'll only pick up the trips of any significance."

Well gosh, would that be so bad? How many of us get paid to drive to work? Or to anywhere relating to work? So instead of councillors maybe not being paid for a few shorter trips, they are paid for perhaps trips they don't even make (because of the flat rate per month). Hmmm. Cushy job if you can get it!

Isn't this one of the reasons our taxes are going up, up, up? All these little things put together. And there are other voters who certainly feel the same about this, and hopefully have not forgotten and won't forget before the November election rolls around. We're here to remind you.

Council mileage increases were enough to make at least one taxpayer 'sick'. Really, the cost of gas is just part of the job, isn't it? Like it is for so many of us who aren't able to vote ourselves a raise to cover the increases.

Now, if it's too difficult for our politicians to keep track of mileage (and these are the people who are running our municipality???), then why not simply use a trip odometer? It's pretty simple and takes a couple of seconds. But our lofty councillors are always full of excuses and are of course defensive about voting themselves the increase. Not the right attitude to take if it's something they aren't embarrassed about and do truly believe is right.

Clarington Council Salaries for 2005

Click on chart above to get a larger view of Mayor and Councillor's remuneration and expenses from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005. Note that Regional Councillors also receive a Regional salary of nearly $41,000.00 on top of municipal salary, as well as additional money for expenses such as more mileage, conferences, local boards, etc.


Regional Pay:

So here is the regional pay, and remember there is additional pay they receive in lieu of pension plan, for sitting on additional boards, committees, and attending conferences, etc. Oh yeah, and Regional Chair, Roger Anderson, who isn't even ELECTED...
Hizzoner's base regional pay is:
Remuneration: $153,846.56
Mileage; $5,115.11
Conferences/Conventions/Meetings: $17,404.72
Total: $176,366.39

Uh-huh. For this kind of money you would think maybe they could work a little harder to keep our tax increases down. Can't there be a limit on increases when budgets aren't balanced or depend on taking more out of taxpayer's pockets to cover increased costs, many of which are NOT in our best interest?

I think Ms Racansky was right in complaining about the municipality's 4.08 percent tax increase for this year. I wish the Mayor had let her speak her piece.

(Salary source - Report FND-004-06, Clarington Finance Dept)