I am so happy that Anna Ashley stuck to her guns on Monday evening, she promised her supporters during the campaign and she got dumped on by the Mayor. I do not believe that his outburst was called for in the public eye . He is no Peter Lester and Anna should be allowed to speak her voice on every issue, I believe this is why we elected her to that seat, hang in Anna.
what did moustache do?
I am glad that she had the integrity to stick to her guns but not sure that bringing the issue up again after it had already been voted on was wise. Perhaps questioning your fellow council members would have been better off behind closed doors. Also, giving out the details regarding the vote may just cause hard feelings between administration and council, building alliances here and putting up walls over there. It must be a tough for Anna right now, she’s walked into the Lions Den and stirred things up a bit. We need someone like that and I hope that her colleagues in council will be patient with her.
What a load of crap, I’m not sure why this council doesn’t publish the voting patterns of their members publicly on their website.
It’s important information for the electorate (not to mention the taxpayers) to know how their councillors vote on every issue, this continuing veil of secrecy is just nuts.
As for dressing down councillor Ashley in public forum, that’s pretty classless as well, she’s been elected to represent our interests, and judging by what I’ve read above she seems to be the only one inclined to do so in that lovely little social club.
Bonecracker said that there might be hard feelings if the vote was released, well too bad, it’s the public money at play here not some corporations flow, they always use that wonderful term of accountability and transperency and then again and again, hide behind the cloak of in camera meetings and such.
Frankly the other council colleagues don’t need to be patient with her, they need to try and figure out why they are there and who they represent and are utlimately accountable to.
That is right on the button there Podunkian, exactly what I was trying to say last evening when I started this post. Anna Ashley was voted in to represent the people who helped vote her in and to speak for us as much as possible. The mayor seemed to be trying to take on the image of Late great Peter Lester something which he will never be. He did work under Mayor Lester for a number of years but I think that is all he can lay claim to. I support Council Lady Ashley for keeping her words she spoke of during her campaign.
You all should read the municipal act before making assumptions that every breath taken by a council member is public domain.
Last nights Daily News article contained quotes from an In Camera meeting that sounded like they were transcribed from a tape recorder.
FYI In Camera meetings have strict guidelines in the Municipal Act.
Municipal Act my ass, did everyone follow it when they did the dirty work when Pond was in signing shit on his own? Anna Ashley was voted in for her beliefs and if I remember so were a few other individuals I thought. Ms. Ashley is strong enough to stand up and not follow like sheep.
I believe that the topic of discussion here was the extension of what seems to be a controversial city employee’s contract and the amount of compensation to be provided for the continuation of those tasks.
Somehow i think the taxpayers deserve to know how the council members stand on that particular issue and if they are on board with the amount of pay to be provided…
It’s all about the transparency there, no personal details need to be released if there are legal concerns, but outlining how the Mayor and each councillor stand and voted on that issue seems to be a logical expectation one would think.
Hostile crowd today. Sheesh!!!
Correct me if I’m wrong but the vote to extend Gord Howie’s contract was done in a closed meeting was it not? If so, I’d like to know the actual reason why that was done that way, not opinions. If it was required to be in a closed meeting by law, regulation or to protect someones interests , how much sense does it make to then publicize it? I don’t mean to sound like I am critizing Anna because I feel that she is a great contributor to our community and I hope that she does well in her newly elected position. I’m am, however, not sure where the logic is in bringing up something from a closed meeting in a public meeting. I also can’t see where making the individual votes in this matter public would benefit anyone. I can see publicizing information that is generally made available to the public but this is more or less internal affairs. Maybe I’m wrong. If someone can provide sound reasoning as to why it should be public rather than just opinions I’m all ears. It would be great to hear from someone who has some knowledge on the municipal act.
Re Gord Howie or any employee of the City.
No matter what position is held, that person is still an employee and subject to his/her employment rights under the law of the land.
Internal personel issues, I believe, are not public domain and I believe they should never be public domain.
Unfortunately Anna could not get a seconder for her motion,therefore there was no discussion. To bring it up second time for discussion without a motion was out of order. For the mayor to dress her down for that was out of line. I think it is about time for all of them to learn what is proper procedure and behaviour in the council chambers.
Couldn’t agree more,there is no room for personal vendettas on council.
Hostile crowd today. Sheesh!!!
Correct me if I’m wrong but the vote to extend Gord Howie’s contract was done in a closed meeting was it not? If so, I’d like to know the actual reason why that was done that way, not opinions. If it was required to be in a closed meeting by law, regulation or to protect someones interests , how much sense does it make to then publicize it?[/quote]
Mayor Musellem said, to paraphrase, that in camera matters are dealt with confidentially, and that, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, that information is not released for at least 12 years.
Isn’t Councillor Ashley the person who spent quite some time chastising the last Mayor and Council for breaching Section 122 of the Community Charter? Didn’t her group use FOI requests to get the job done? Now she has no issue completely ignoring, and breaking, provisions in the Act?
I don’t mean to sound like I am critizing Anna because I feel that she is a great contributor to our community and I hope that she does well in her newly elected position. I’m am, however, not sure where the logic is in bringing up something from a closed meeting in a public meeting.[/quote]
It’s pretty illogical, especially considering she did it twice. First her motion that the vote be made public was defeated, and at the end of the meeting she brought it up again–and then was ‘dressed down’ by the Mayor. This ‘dressing down’ involved him raising his voice, certainly, but his frustration is kindof understandable. Ideally Mayor and Council should keep their composure, but ideally you don’t bring something up after your motion has already been defeated, either.
Councillor Ashley said she was keeping promises she made to her voters, which is why she tried to push the vote’s results through to the public. As for your sound reasoning, I mentioned it up top–and I’m assuming the Mayor is correct on this one.
Although I was extremely disappointed in the Mayor’s action, I was proud of Anna for bringing the subject forward. If the Mayor was so concerned about the discussion, then he should not have moved the item from an In-Camera issue to an open meeting. When Council decides to move an item that has been dealt with in an In-Camera meeting, you will always risk discussion on the matter.
Anna, Jack and Gina all ran on the platform of transparency, and so far, the only one living up to this is Anna. Jack unfortunately needs a wake up call - he didn’t win by a popular vote - he lost to Don Scott because people decided to elect the only choice that they thought they had.
Jack needs to wake up…
what we need to do is hire a mayor from out of town. i dont think either of the choices we had were good enough.
i know you cant “hire” but be nice
Before people go jumping to conclusions about Jack Moustachio and his tirade, they should go read up on the Local Government Act/Municipal Act/Community Charter and find out what is actually public knowledge. I think you might find that Jack was right and Anna was wrong, regardless of her campaign promises.
For the record, I did not vote for Jacko.
Councillor Ashley broke the rules–plain and simple. Perhaps Mayor Musellem was more harsh than the situation required, but with every word that came out of Councillor Ashley’s mouth she made the entire Council look more and more ridiculous.
She fulfilled her promise to her voters–she tried to get the vote publicized. Forgetting the fact that bringing it up once was pretty silly, why bring it up a second time?
So that brings Bedard,s name to light once again.So what excuse do we give bring someone new in sell them so property and then we convince them to run?
I know Bedard has all the bases covered.
Councillor Ashley broke the rules–plain and simple.[/quote]
So you’re saying that make a motion to publicize something that happened in camera is breaking the rules?
If so, can you point out what rule she broke?