South Bruce Peninsular - SBP Council Puzzle missing Pieces - Comments

FACT

Dan O. — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:26:12 -0400

CL; Dodge backed his facts up with proof. You've made many accusations with only the word "FACT" to back it up. You now have the opportunity to show proof of what you speak in an open forum.

How can you base fact on a third person verbal statement? Unless someone had a tape recorder or you were present what you've presented is here say. On top of that you end sentences with inuendos. What is so factual about that?

Why you've taken on a personal vendetta against the mayor I don't understand. If you ask for open minds and listening ears you need to look at what you're saying first.

Dan O.

The Skewer is at it again

beendere — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:38:42 -0400

I thought you'd moved CL. Well, actually, floated away.

Why would anyone worry about a lawsuit if they've done nothing wrong BUT a few are running scared(FACT). For your information Councillors Gilbert and Varley brought up the idea of having a code of ethics early in the previous council and Councillor Wunderlich voted against it(Fact), Go figure!!

I take it you're not attending the March 20th meeting. The reason I say this is because you said "it would take open minds and listening ears".

My POV - guarded comments

CL1368 — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:37:46 -0400

Mayor Gilbert has gone on record stating the EA vote was not the sole reason she returned from the convention. It was regarding the email that was circulating, that called her character and role as mayor into question. She did state in the paper that when she got wind of the email, she had no doubt that she was returning. The specific email she referred to has been posted in this weblog. This goes back to my very original comment regarding a missing piece of the puzzle. (all FACT)

Since then she has verbally warned all councillors that her legal counsel is addressing this matter, and in addition, others have been contacted and forewarned. (yes this is FACT) Interesting to note how the timing of garym's posting regarding "basic facts about holding discussions online" co-incides with the Mayor's threat and the obvious reduction of postings here. (Yes this is FACT)

So, just like in the election campaign when we questioned the truth about the $60k payout to the former Fire Chief from the Town on Councillor Gilbert's behalf, we are snuffed again or risk the wrath of the now Mayor. Even when confronted with proof of check numbers and amounts it was denied by her. (FACT from Wiarton Public Meeting) Pointing fingers and trhreatening lawsuits. (FACT from Sauble Beach public meeting)This is not the way it should be. Remember freedom of speach? Remember telling the truth?

I am releived to see the Code of Ethics finally allowed to be tabled by Councillor Wunderlich for Council's discussion. (FACT) I was also happy to see the reports presented to Council from the conference that he had promised. (FACT) We did not see any written reports from Mayor Gilbert as she had promised. Another broken promise? Why?

I am sure that the next meeting with HP on March 20th will shed light on all councillors and the public regarding the EA process. Hopefully all the smoke and mirrors will be revealed and we can move on, whichever is the right direction. It will take open minds and listening ears at this meeting. I hope it goes well.

The FACTS are stated for the benefit of those who post here and think I am full of ......hot air! Check for yourself.

....keeping those feet hot.

Mayor Gilbert Gets Community Support

Dodge — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:23:38 -0400

There were three letters in yesterday's Sun Times, all supporting Mayor Gilbert's effort to bring fiscal and moral responsibility to Council. One of the letters is particularly hard on Councillor Dan Kerr. From what I am hearing he has criticized our Mayor on a local radio station and some people who voted for him are mightily unimpressed with his behavior.

Hockey wrote this 2 weeks ago and it seems he has predictive powers: no matter how you spin what the magnificent 4 did, it reflects badly on the Town and has voters questioning why the 4 were elected to represent the entire town.

It turned out as Hockey said.

The four walkout councillors knew they would face flak but it was the lesser of two evils for them. They risked their reputations to make sure the pipeline project was continued.

Councllor Wunderlich's resolution was to force the Town to continue the addendum process of updating the Water and Sewer EA. This EA is a one trick pony. It can only go down one channel and that chanel is the pipeline. It is of no use for a small project because the EA's preferred solution has been set with the pipeline. The walkout councillors risked their reputations to keep the pipeline going. It is now going badly for them. In spite of all their excuses that particular EA is good for nothing else unless there is a new addendum to change it to a different project in a different direction. This current updating addendum they so badly want will not cover anything else except the pipeline. They know it. They want it anyway.

We are all so damn lucky that the mayor and Councillor King came back that night and bought us a few weeks of time at least until early April. A better option has always existed.

We are about to find out on March 20 that spending any funds on the leftover pipeline baggage from the previous administration is wasted money. We have to make a clean break.

We have another path ahead of us and there is a good chance of receiving funding and bringing almost the whole community on board.

Where does that leave Councillor Dan Kerr? Apparently his role for the next 3 years will be to go on the radio and snipe at the mayor. In between times he could organize walkouts or do whatever he can to impede real progress on the Mayor's agenda.

Can we expect a sea change anyime soon?

Me Too

beendere — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 23:03:31 -0500

Hey Mockler,

Again, your logic astounds me. According to you,I have a lack of knowledge. To help me along, you tell me that ministers don't listen to engineers. Then why are we paying for them to be there. Please don't tell me that Henderson Paddon pays, because if so,obviously,they will then bill us later. Let them simply prepare the paper work and the Town rep can take it along. Certainly will cut costs.

What happens if only 2 Town reps go and they have 2 meetings at the same time? Does the minister say get lost to the one who is not the mayor I'm only speaking to the Mayor. When it comes right down to it why would we send anyone but the Mayor since that is the only person to whom the minister will listen .

Christine is the anchor of the CFOS 560 morning show. WOW!!! Those names I mentioned earlier had better watch their backs as, I'm sure, their networks will be moving her in as the replacement, as soon as they faulter- and as soon as those networks ever hear of CFOS AM 560. I am being facetious here, obviously, and I'm sure Christine works hard but...

Again, you missed another of my thoughts. I didn't say I would be watching expense accounts. I was referring to why you would watch and how you were going to use the info.

SBPC

zodiac — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 21:10:49 -0500

Thanks so much for your comments. I am new
to this site, but I support what you are
saying, and I shudder to think what we are
in for the next 31/2 yrs with members of a
Council, such as Hoath,Harron,Kerr and Lamont
suddenly departing a duly called meeting
without permission from the Chairman.
I have one comment with respect to your
dialogue with CL1368? He has indicated his
"Take" on fitting the pieces to the puzzle
(from where he sits)...I can assure him that
from where I sit...he is sitting in the wrong
place. I would not expect this from a so-called
pipe line Consultant! Does he,by any chance have a
"Hidden Agenda" ?? or is he being influenced by a
"CLOSE" ENCOUNTER OF THE WORST KIND? Zodiac.

yet again

mmockler — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:46:08 -0500

Hey hockey,
Insteresting to see your lack of knowledge about how presentations are made to Ministers of the Crown. They are not there to listen to staff, nor are they there to listen to engineers (they have staff for that). They are there to listen to the elected officials. And, not to belittle Mark's position, they are there to listen to the Mayor/Warden - not one lone councillor.
Jeff Graham provided excellent back-up for Mark (as he has done for the Town on many occasions and hence the reason for the thank-you dinner). But first and foremost, a Cabinet Minister does not want to hear from staff or engineers.
And I will pass your comments on to Christine Curtis. You are obviously not tuned in to the local media. FYI, she is the anchor of the CFOS 560 morning show.
And I too will be watching the expense accounts and just how many reports our Mayor and Mr. King will present to council to justify the cost incurred by the taxpayers to send them to this conference.
Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

SBPC

zodiac — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:36:52 -0500

THANKS for your input to Melissa
Cackler-WunderWoman. I have tried to follow
all the pettiness and sour grapes, and I'm
still looking for maturity....so far I am
only seeing it from you and "Dodge" and
"Garym" and a couple of others. We are more
than a little concerned that our former
Mayor is reaching in from his "Sour Grapes"
past and continuing his contamination with
his sheep.....namely Councillor WunderBar
in particular, but unfortunately, Councillors
Hoath and Harron as well. Amd who in the
world is this CL--- guy (or gal)???
Keep up the good work!! Zodiac.

About your sorrrowful correction

beendere — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:28:22 -0500

MMochler, Hockey here. It appears you can read but do you comprehend. I believe you said I should be sure of my facts. If you reread my previous reply, I believe I wrote,"word has it" which would indicate this was not fact. I also qualified that statement by identifying that I wasn't there and thus it wasn't fact.What part of that did you not understand???

Later, in your rebuttal, you state that Mark was all alone to make his presentation. Then you say the reason Mark paid for dinner was to thank Jeff Graham for being with him during his presentation to the Minister of Natural resources. Which was it??? Both you and he claim what big shoulders he has and how he had to lead the Mayor around by the hand. All of a sudden, he can't function on his own?? What's your point??

As yet ,I fail to see any positiveness towards the elected officials, just the defence of Mark.

You insist Mark has been trying to support the Mayor since the election. Could you please enlighten us on what he has done towards that end?

Again I must ask, what was the sneaky move? It would appear that while you were dining, Mark was probably confident his EA motion would pass because obviously there was a plan afoot. It backfired and now you blame the Mayor and Art King. For what???

I've heard of Walter Cronkite, Knowlton Nash, Dan Rather ,and Peter Mansbridge but who,in the scheme of things, is Christine Curtis? She( Christine C.) mentions something was questionable but what is truly questionable is thinking that what she has to say is important.

How was money wasted by the Mayor and Mr King since they returned to the conference directly after the meeting here? I'm sure they felt that the meeting they missed was in good hands with Mark at the controls. I'll also bet that the Mayor will NOT claim gas and or mileage for the trip up and back that day.

I agree with you, curious taxpayers do want to know-- not answers to the questions you've brought up but instead why the 4 walked out and gave no valid explanations to their move thus embarassing the entire Town.

Will watching expense accounts finally result in any positive comments towards the Mayor and council or are you looking for more ways to put people down.

your comment

mmockler — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:21:31 -0500

Hey there,
Sorry to hear that Gwen thought the Sauble River mouth project was not that important. As you may know, that was the subject of the meeting with the Honourable David Ramsay, the Minister of Natural Resources - the meeting that our Mayor requested and then ditched.
A lot of other people think this is an important project.
Maybe we should let all the Anglers groups in the area know this as well . . . and to think of it . . . the boating community too.
And, Doug, as a former Queen's Park political staffer, I can tell you that a good presentation will sway a Cabinet Minister - I saw it happen a few times to the Minister I worked for. Good Roads isn't as predictable as you may think.
Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

My take on the EA

Ron Forbes — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:54:56 -0500

I was introduced to this site a couple of weeks ago and I find your chat intriguing. I have become bored with my sand-box and I think your sand box is more challenging, even with the sticks and stones. I used screened sand in my sand-box. Even the sand box playing should be respectful and truthful.

My pet peeve is the environment. I do not drink water from the ditch and I do not need Henderson & Paddon to give me a large invoice to remind me. The EA is based on poor science.

I Love A Good Strategy

Dodge — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:57:01 -0500

Even a strategy that does not work is interesting. When you have choices A or B and you choose B because you can predict some of the outcomes even in the unfolding it interests me. That is just the way I am.

Bad information skews the unfolding and makes it difficult to predict the outcome. Good Roads comes every year and it consists of municipal politicians meeting ministerial assistants and sometimes a brief chat with a minister. Always staff prepare the answers ahead of time and it can be a charade. It is a perk and acceptable to have a dinner and a bit of a vacation and I find no problem with that nor do I care who spent what or who had the best time. However when the reports here start to interfere with the outcome of another strategy to put an end to the pipeline disaster I will write something.

When I heard the Mayor had been in Wiarton Monday night I guessed what had happened. When Melissa posted that Mayor Gilbert left before an important meeting I decided to check. I phoned and asked point blank did you leave an important meeting? A long answer but in short "no".

Amabel Property Owners President is present at most Council functions and keeps close tabs on what is said. That email is easily had for the asking since it was distributed as a broadcast. I read about it here first. Sometimes things are overheard or said at a local coffee shop or the Horn that get back to me. Those who know me from past times will know that I gather information and make conclusions and I have made a couple of mistakes in the past it is not a perfect process.

Even the former Mayor learned to stop talking at Lodge because some of it was getting back to me. :)
A council resolution to continue the addendum to update the pipeline EA is what caused the walkout. The EA is pipeline specific and includes HEPWORTH. The preferred solution as selected covers no other alternative.
My main strategy interest is what happens to the addendum in the next few days and unless someone reaches Yvonne the outcome is not the one most of the residents want. It will be continued and the vote to do so controlled by the walkout Councillors. What has changed the possible outcome is that this thing is getting a public profile and attention on what they are doing is bad for Yvonne and probably Stan Hoath.

From my perspective the more posted here the more profile this thing gets. Mayor Gilbert has not lost any support of that I am certain. Profile means people are phoning Councillor Harron. The strategy outcome of that is not clear.

My biggest disappointment is Phil McNichol. If he was half the reporter he used to be he would have picked up on the email and the return trip plan and interviewed Yvonne rather than quoting Mark that Sauble puts out more raw sewage than Halifax a city of a mere 500,000. That is a piece of information that is about as useful as the ditchwater samples. :)

a correction sorely needed

mmockler — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:14:56 -0500

Hey Hockey,

I don't know where you get your info, but before you spread gossip around, you should be sure of your facts.

Yes, Mark and I did go out to dinner on Monday night, after Mark attended EVERY scheduled meeting and seminar that the taxpayers paid for (pity the Mayor and Mr. King can't say the same thing). Daytimes are for meetings. Dinner at 9 p.m. I believe is perfectly acceptable.

And yes, a member of Henderson and Paddon was in attendance, along with his wife and Norm Gamble, who is head of the local LIHN. The topic of discussion mainly centered on our kids and how we are all working to get them through college. It was just a congenial evening after a long day.

But, contrary to what you write, MARK paid for that meal - out of his own pocket. Check his expenses - we ate at the Taro Grill on Queen St. The reason Mark paid was that he wanted to show his thanks to Jeff Graham for helping with the meeting with the Minister of Natural Resources after the Mayor ditched said meeting.

If you would care to meet me, I will show you the receipt.

And to correct another of your so-called "facts." Mr. King is NOT the deputy mayor. While Ms. Gilbert has taken to calling him that - that is a decision of council - a decision that has NOT been made.

As to why Mark did not come back from the conference? I guess he had a naive belief that the Mayor - a Mayor he has been trying hard to support since the election - would not pull a sneaky move like this. Believe me, he won't be fooled again.

And again, to correct the record - the vote on Monday night was to continue the EA on future expansion of the Wiarton water system. Council is on record, as passed in their minutes, that the pipeline project will ONLY go ahead if there is 2/3rds funding from the senior levels of government.

Ratepayers have every right to be ashamed of the political manoevering our Mayor tried this week.

As Christine Curtis of 560 CFOS said this morning on "From Where I Sit"

"It was wrong for Gilbert and King to ditch Good Roads and a meeting with the people from Natural Resources. It was a meeting South Bruce Peninsula requested, obviously for an important reason. Meetings with Ministers don't come along every day, and leaving slighted their responsibility. Leaving Councillor Wunderlich behind to make the presention alone without even warning him was at best would I would describe as "questionable.'"

Mark is on the record as saying this behaviour will not be tolerated by ANY member of council. I believe every taxpayer should demand the same thing.

And, just when is the Mayor paying back the County and Mr. King paying back the Town for the money they wasted?

Curious taxpayers want to know.

Remember, watching expense accounts works both ways.

Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

Whatever

CL1368 — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:13:35 -0500

hockey17, you will note that I was being provided answers to my initial questions by the likes of Dodge. I would trust that those were facts, like the email, as it has already cost me 2 points elsewhere in this blog site. Your questions are answered with your own "facts" which should be a new topic. I will not address them here. Move on. Your 2 cents worth are 2 late.

Opinions aren't facts

beendere — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:24:00 -0500

After responding to MMockler about being positive towards our elected council and pointing out to CL1368 to use fact not assumption or opinion, he comes up with this opinionated epistle totally void of fact. When he is questioned , he never answers with fact , just opinion and supposition.

Here are some questions with fact included;

1) Why is the Mayor being blamed for Monday
night's Town embarassment. Their plan was all set.
The vote would be taken ( FACT- the Mayor had asked a week before to move the vote to another date when everyone could attend but that was voted down).It appears the results
would be 4-2 in favour of completing the EA. Oh,no
she's back with her deputy. What a dirty trick she pulled, spoiling our ploy. Run!!!

2) Why didn't Mark come back? It was his motion(FACT). The Mayor should have told him. Didn't she realize when she was elected Mayor, she became his mother too, although as reported by Melissa, HE was the Mayors guiding light at the conference. Where was he? Word is ,he was at dinner with his wife, paid for by Henderson Paddon . I don't know if this is fact, since I wasn't there.

3) Why is John Close sending an inflammatory email to a councillor who in turn sent it to all coucillors(FACT). He, too, points out things said, that he wasn't present to hear. That's hearsay and,in law,not permissable as fact.Could this be sour grapes on his part for his election loss. Did he congratulate Gwen on her victory?

4)Instead of walking out Monday night, after whispering and note passing, were there any other options available? Roberts Rules says yes(FACT). They could have a) tabled the motion, as Stan Hoath ask for in informal session(FACT), b) adjourned the meeting or c)voted on the EA motion when they returned to formal session. FACT-they ran out and did't even have the courage of there convictions to TRUTHFULLY say why.

5)In his campaign, John Close said he was tired of the gossip,& rumors and would lead a unified open, transparent, council(FACT).Is that email his idea of an open,honest communication style? Why didn't he go to the Mayor directly, face to face, and ask his questions?

6)On 98,the Beach,on Thursday morning Mark told Gwen and the audience that all these goings on should be put behind them and they should move ahead positively. Did his Friday morning interview on 560 reflect that view??? Which view will we see in council chambers Monday and in the future???

Finally, I think those of you who have a bias towards the Mayor for whatever reason, and are prepared to listen to factless rumors and gossip should take a good look at yourselves. (FACT) Mature, intelligent adults who really want to know the truth and move this Town forward in a positive direction , go with an open mind, question the person(s) who would know the truth, listen, research and evaluate, then make an informed intelligent comment or decision.

SBP Council Puzzle missing Pieces

CL1368 — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:58:39 -0500

Well, anyone at the SBP Council Meeting last night must have been as confused as I was.

Hereâ€™s the pieces to the puzzle, from where I sit and have observed:

At the last Council meeting, the meter program motion to defer to a time when all councilors were present was defeated and the ensuing tie vote meant that the meter program was not approved. This vote was tension filled, and the sides were very evident.

The next item for vote, regarding the school development, was rescheduled to the March 12th meeting by the Mayor after confirming with only Councilor King that he would be with her on February 26th and therefore not be at last nights meeting. Those paying close attention to the whisperings of the Mayor deduct there would not be a full Council present last night.